On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 7:13 AM, Antonio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2008/12/2 Nathan Bubna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> So, would this change likely break many applications built on 2.1.0? > > not from a typical user perspective, only extension developers.
yeah, then i'd say just keep 2.1.0 as beta, and make sure to highlight the change in the next release notes, so as not to surprise extension developers badly. >> If so, then yeah, such API instability warrants an Alpha designation. >> Otherwise, if it would only break a few advanced uses, then i think >> that can still legitimately be called beta. > > Ok I feel better now :-P :) > Antonio >
