On Sun, Dec 25, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Matthew Dillon <dil...@apollo.backplane.com > wrote:
> Well, the precedent is basically that all the 'hard' SMP concurrency work > is now done, and we're finally seeing the fruits of our labor in > performance numbers. That's the idea anyhow. > > -Matt > Part of my point was that I don't think that reason, the concurrency work specifically, is a good reason to call a release 3.0 instead of 2.12 or 2.14. The only precedent we have to go by to date is 2.0, which was a major user-facing feature release. I feel the precedent that was set by that release was a very good one and that we should consider very hard sticking to it and the ramifications of a potential "major version bump because we are feeling pretty good about ourselves" precedent before calling this next release 3.0. But it sounds like you have already made up your mind. Sam
