Oct. 7, 2008
1:03 p.m.
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 09:20:23AM -0300, Facundo Batista wrote:
I don't want to keep deferring 3.0 months and months, I prefer to have a redesigned schedule now, and stick to it as much as possible, even if the 3.0 version is not as robust as we would want.
Another, related policy issue: must 3.1 be compatible with 3.0? Or is 3.0 an experimental version in some respects (for example, the stdlib) and 3.1 the 'final' version?
--amk