In open source it's usually the people who *need a feature* who end up supplying the patch that adds it. Saying out loud on the mailing list that you are willing to delay a release is fine and all, but someone still has to do the work. Who is that person?
cr On Nov 15, 2012, at 11:00 AM, Emmanuel TAUREL <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello, > > On 15/11/2012 17:22, Pieter Hintjens wrote: >> >> >> Now, what are the expectations here? Recall that this is a free >> software package, built by a community, and funded by users who are >> decent enough to pay for support, or to submit patches. >> >> Are we happy to delay the 3.2 release so we can make it work with the 3.1 >> beta? >> >> -Pieter >> >> Ps. it's probably pretty simple to make 3.2 talk to 3.1, it'll take a >> "please talk to 3.1" option and a little work on the encoders. > > My vote is in favor of compatibility. > If making 3.2 talk to 3.1 is "pretty simple", it could be added to 3.2 > even if it delays 3.2 by few days. > But will it also solve the other way round: 3.1 talk to 3.2? > > Thank's for your answers and your time _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
