On Sat, 2002-11-23 at 12:19, Cliff Woolley wrote: > On Sat, 23 Nov 2002, Aaron Bannert wrote:
> > > + * The 'modules/experimental' tree will evaporate soon. Anything > > > + in the development branch should be located under it's eventual > > > + home (such as modules/cache/.) > > > > There's no reason to remove this from the 2.0 releases. They are > > experimental not matter way, and if someone grabs a 2.0 tarball and > > wants to start hacking on experimental stuff, all the better! > > -1 to removing them from 2.0. The modules are 'experimental' not just > because they are development projects, but more because we don't put the > same level of faith in those modules working as advertised as we do in > regular modules. But some people are willing to take the chance and DO > use them in production! We can't just snatch them out from under those > people. I agree: we should keep the experimental modules. The cache code is a good example of a beta-quality component that's getting a healthy amount of testing and feedback from users because it's available as an experimental subsystem in the stable release. Brian
