Is it time for D 3.0?

[KennyTM~]

Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Paul D. Anderson" <paul.d.removethis.anderson at comcast.andthis.net> wrote in 
> message news:gd07uh$2ckt$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> I posted this comment already in the phobos/tango thread but I thought it 
>> might be of more general interest.
>>
>> With all the changes being discussed -- many of the breaking changes -- is 
>> it time to move on to D version 3.0?
>>
>> It seems to me a natural division exists between 2.0, when we had to 
>> choose between tango and phobos; and 3.0, when we got to use them both.
>>
>> Some of the other recent discussions here, template syntax, for example, 
>> could fall on the other side of the 2.0/3.0 divide.
>>
>> I'm sure Walter and others have discussed when and how the move to 3.0 
>> will occur. Just wondering if this important change should be a factor.
>>
> 
> Maybe, but I'd hate to see the D1/D2 divide end up becoming a D1/D2/D3 
> divide. 
> 
> 

This looks kinda like the Debian stable/testing/unstable branches.