On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 10:20:05AM -0800, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: >... > Let me just go on record saying that I don't think we're in a > position to release another version.
Of course we are. Call it an alpha. If you don't even think that is fine, then call it a developer snapshot. >... > I won't be voting on any 2.0.33 releases or rather I will be > casting a negative vote because I don't want another public You mean that you won't vote to call it beta. But Ryan can easily post a "developer" release called 2.0.33 for people. A number of users can't get the stuff out of CVS, so the tarballs are very good for them. > release without our API changes (both of which have been posted). > That obviously won't stop the release if the majority agrees > with you. -- justin As Ryan pointed out, there is no such thing as a true API freeze. And trying to establish a "hard freeze" isn't going to work. There are quite a few things that people might want to change, but just haven't had time to get to. A freeze is effectively a smackdown for those people, a little slap against their lack of time. It isn't right, and it isn't good for the code. If an API is wrong, or it doesn't lead to a great server, then it needs to change, and it *will* get changed. Cheers, -g -- Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
