On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Matthew Flatt <[email protected]> wrote: > At Thu, 10 Feb 2011 18:20:51 -0500, Eli Barzilay wrote: >> So instead of changing the 510 back to 400, I think that I'll remove >> it completely, and make the packing code not include any version >> requirements at all, and make the unpacking code not check any version >> requirements from older versions. >> >> Matthew: does this sound reasonable? > > It's difficult to tell, but that sounds plausible.
This sounds like a bad idea for 5.1 If this is what we believe the right thing is, then I think that you should go back to 410 for the 5.1 release and look into removing it for 5.2. Robby _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/dev
