Will many be spooked by the jump in version number into fearing incompatibility with older scripts...?
I wonder if we'll end up trying to persuade the user community that the changes are small ("no, don't worry, your scripts will still work") and yet big ("honest, it really deserves to be called 2.0, it's not just a ploy") at the same time.
I see your concerns, but I think the trick is to be honest, just as Guido was. We simply say it was bumped to V2 for the reasons of percieved maturity, and a clear break from CNRI Python. Both seem reasonable. I believe many people will simply wait for some form of consensus on the newsgroup, regardless of the version number. Personally, Im a little - umm - lets just say that I can see the irony in the fact that I recently changed a few bits of code that were dependent on a hard-coded "Python15.dll" to work not only with 1.6, but _all_ of the 1.x family. I figured there was no point trying to predict the packaging details of the 2.x family, seeing it as still some time off. Nothing like foresight :-) And-"foresight"-isnt-an-excuse-for-Tim-to-get-back-on-the-topic-of-his-geni tals-<wink>-ly, Mark.