+1 seems like a good idea to me. Ciao Michele
Kevin Dangoor wrote: > I've commented that I'm not entirely fond of the notion of splitting > the list into "-users" and "-devel". Earlier today, it struck me that > it *is* important to do so, however. > > During 0.9's development, I thought it important that the things we > were working on were getting the attention of the community as a > whole. The downside to this, though, is that more people probably > moved to the svn trunk version than was wise and that people would > have seen the reports of things breaking and possibly gotten the wrong > impression of TurboGears 0.8's stabiity. > > I'm imagining the kinds of conversations we're going to have about > First Class and I really don't want that to trip people up from all of > the great things we've built for the 0.9 release. > > I don't think the split is so much a split between core development > and what most users are doing and asking about. I think the split is > more about people using current (0.8 and 0.9) releases and future > development (First Class, at present). > > So, I propose making a new list called turbogears-future, specifically > chartered for discussions about the next (or even farther down the > line) major version of TurboGears. Bug fixes and minor features that > show up in the current releases will continue to appear on this list. > > How does that strike you? > > Kevin > > -- > Kevin Dangoor > Author of the Zesty News RSS newsreader > > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > company: http://www.BlazingThings.com > blog: http://www.BlueSkyOnMars.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TurboGears" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/turbogears -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
