Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from March 2000
On Fri, Mar 31, 2000 at 01:49:29PM -0800, Gurusamy Sarathy wrote: > I set about making a 5.6.0 release because: > > * Nobody but me was working to make the now experimental features > stable I understand your frustration about this fact. However, allow me to note that IMO this may be explained in part by your ways to treat patches sent to p5p. Say, now I have very little interest in participation in Perl development. > * I ran out of time a _long_ time ago (you wouldn't believe the > amount of "real work" that has slipped just so I can herd the Perl > cats into reasonable shape for a release) There is no way to make a bullet-proof whatever.whatever.0 release. However, since we know it is *very much* flawed, having it mentioned in the announcement would look more proper. > * It's been too long since there has been a proper release, and > what we had had enough bug fixes to be a proper release on its > own merits This is a double-edge argument. Since it was so long, having an extra couple of months of a public beta (even if marked as 5.6.0!) would not make things any more delayed. > * I entertain vague hopes that perhaps putting out a release will > spur contributions to address the experimental features Definitely. We on p5p have a clear understanding of the (mis)quality of 5.6.0, so will not deploy it as if it were a stable release. So *for us* an early release is a plus: more testing, more bug reports etc. However, it does not look fair wrt poor sysadms who are pressed by lusers "there is a latest and greatest new release, we need it NOW!". Ilya