[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: What I think 1.1 gold needs:

From: Miles Bader
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: What I think 1.1 gold needs:
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 16:52:30 -0500
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.28i

On Wed, Nov 26, 2003 at 11:59:51PM +0900, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
> For what it's worth, python-dev has this discussion perennially, and
> after the releases of 2.3.1 and 2.3.2  in early autumn, the release
> manager remarked that he'd had a fair number of "thank you" mails, and
> that most didn't mention features at all, but of those which did, all
> said something equivalent to "Thank God you added no new features."

I presume they must have been talking about features that are in some way
interface-incompatible because otherwise why would they care enough to
mention it in such strong terms?

Part of the problem is `what's a feature?'  [Besides `a documented bug' :]

I mean, obviously adding a new scheme interpreter and toms-all-singing-all-
dancing-super-merge-mode are the sort of things most people would give that
label, but what about the case I mentioned before, where a function is
extended to work in a area where it failed before?  One could also call that
a bugfix of sorts, though it's not a core-dump kind of bug, just `missing
functionality' (where that functionality would otherwise be expected).

All I can think to say is `Don't piss off your users in a stable release.'
This depends on the release guy being reasonable, but I think Tom is at

80% of success is just showing up.  --Woody Allen

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]