On 17 Sep 2010, at 18:35 , Richard S. Hall wrote: > From my point of view, approach (1) might not be awesome, but it results in a > simpler process than (2). So, I'd recommend (1). If the majority prefers (2), > then we can do that (although I think we'll have to run the decision by the > board first).
I prefer (1) too. I could see us combine (1) with (2), releasing implementations with both our own APIs which gives us the freedom to experiment with a new API whilst still "supporting what's provided by public releases of draft specs. In the end, we are an open source project, so we should stick to what's available out in the open. Greetings, Marcel
