Nathan Kurz wrote on 6/18/13 5:18 PM: > 3) I don't see anything wrong with occasionally breaking binary > compatibility to fix mistakes, improve clarity, and clear out cruft. > The chances of getting an API right the first time are slim. Rather > than worrying that everything has to be perfect for eternity when > declared public, it's comforting to know that there will be a time one > can make improvements. >
+1 Nate and I are often simpatico on this "don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good" position. That said, we also don't write a lot of code for Lucy. :) IMO it would be good for the [perceived] health of our project if we could move toward a 0.4 release. That seems most important to me. I don't want to undermine whatever energy there is around this particular feature thread; I do want to urge us on toward a release. If the two things are not incompatible, all the better. -- Peter Karman . http://peknet.com/ . [email protected]
