Jeremy Hylton [jeremy@beopen.com] wrote: > Perhaps I am too easy-going, but I consider the 2.0 release a > 'dot-release' masquerading as a major revision. It might be a little > silly, but it seems even sillier to preserve a naming scheme that > makes users think that the technology is immature. I have to say I always thought Guido was a bit conservative... 1.3 -> 1.4 would have been a 3.x release from any "other company", and certainly 1.4 to 1.5 has some major new things (exception changes, etc). I think X.Y means X MAY introduce backward incompatibility, but doesn't have to. It just means major new functionality... I've seen a few of our customers go... "But wait, it's only at 1.5"... yeah, so? Chris -- | Christopher Petrilli | petrilli@amber.org
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4