Hmmm... > > For getting 2.0 out of beta: I use 2.0 for a long time in all my > > projects and it is very stable, there is no reason for not to use it > > in production environment, I really should rename it to 2.0 final. The > > only thing I see is, what Neil mentioned, that there a some (small) > > issuses with old 1.x code, that might be a showstopper, when upgrading > > old projects. > > > > This is not a valid enough reason in my opinion to hold off a release. > 1.x is HTML::Embperl and not Embperl. I think the new package name > indicates there is something more in the change then just a general > update. I have run 2.x and 1.x on the same machine with no problems (in > the later releases of 2.x). I feel as long as it is clearly indicated > in the make process, in the readme and on the Embperl site that there > are known syntax issues between 1.x and 2.x that it OK to release. The > user still has to change his conf file to reflect Embperl vs. > HTML::Embperl to in fact use the updated
Isn't going to 2.0 a major release? So if minor things break between 1.X and 2.0, this should be expected? (just a thought of mine) -- The Open Source Business Network in SA ...will be open soon! Watch this space. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
