On 28/05/2015 03:17, Jim Jagielski wrote:
> No need to go off... 2.2 has been out for almost 10 years. > 2.4 for a bit over 3. That is a LONG time. I'm simply > *suggesting* (no BDFL posturing Mr. Rowe) that after 10 > years, maybe it's time to say that 2.2's era is done, and > 2.4's time is here, if not already past. I'm simply trying > to encourage us to work on the future and not "focus" on > the past. No need to read anything more into that, or > take on a onerous or holier-than-thou tone. > > My apologies if "Anyone else think it's time to EOL 2.2 and focus > on 2.4 and the next gen?" was such an egregious question! > Shame on me for even asking! :) >From the responses I got when I mentioned EOL 2.2 in a discussion a few months back, it was very clear a few here enjoy living in the dark ages and were most passionate about staying there for the time being :) Cheers
