Neal wrote: > 'Major' releases (roughly corresponding to Linux kernel even releases) > would occur every ~ 18-36 months. These releases would be full > executable, doc, etc. This seems to be the crux of what many people > want. They want a vibrant changing language. But they don't want to > have to deal with that change. They want longer cycles. We are > talking about users of the language, not hard-core developers. These > releases would still go through the alpha, beta, gamma releases. The > last development release in a cycle would become the first alpha. > Bugfix or point releases (eg, 2.x.y) would be made as needed, ~ 3 > months. These releases would still go through the alpha, beta, gamma > releases. This release would be concurrent with the development > release. BINGO! That's what I want as a production user. Punctuated equilibrium, as the paleontologists call it. (I'd tighten up the interval to 12-18 months, but that's a quibble.) Paul Hughett
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