Yes, that does seem much better.
On Feb 11, 2011, at 11:55 AM, Robby Findler
<[email protected]> wrote:
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
