1.0 ??

[Dave]

RA wrote:
> == Quote from Georg Wrede (georg.wrede at nospam.org)'s article
>> We might also promise to not publish a new (stable) version within 12
>> months of 1.0. (This may really be a more important promise for the
>> customers and prospective developers and consultants than we here
>> realize just off-hand.)
> 
> 
> I wouldn't want to hear a promise like that.  To me, it makes it sound like
> there's definately not going to be any new improvements\features for at least the
> next year.
> 
> I think you would be better off not making any statement about the "next"
> version... period.
> 

One way to handle this would be to not place any public links up for the "version next" model except 
in these newgroups. Then the community (all of us "beta testers") would be aware of it, and it would 
have a web presence, but the public at large wouldn't confuse it with "unstability".

> If you really want to promise anything, something along the lines of "All
> updates\versions\releases will be backwards compatible with 1.0 for the next 12
> months (or until 2.0), except for unintended 'features' caused by bugs." would be
> plenty to imply a stable platform.
> 
> Just my opinion of course.