Re: Plan for 2.0

[Andy Wingo <wingo@pobox.com>]

Hi Neil,

On Sat 03 Jan 2009 19:38, "Neil Jerram" <neiljerram@googlemail.com> writes:

> We're clearly moving towards a 2.0 release.  Here is my attempt to
> pull that together a bit and flesh out what needs to be done.

I think the plan is sensible.

> 2. The "vm" branch.  Once the review of "master" is done, we'll merge
> "vm" into "master".

I still need to finish documenting things, and tying up loose ends. I'm
especially concerned about ABI and future compatibility. But this can be
done in vm or master.

> I'm wondering now if we should instead move the GH code into a
> separate library, "libgh", but continue to provide this as part of the
> Guile distribution.

If we do this, the resulting "product" should have "deprecated"
somewhere in its name. You wouldn't want people mistaking it for
"high-level".

My personal opinion is that we should move this stuff to C files that
the user can include in her own project, and distribute those C files
somewhere. But perhaps this is not feasible.

> That's all for now.  Any concerns or comments?

Yay! :-)

Cheers,

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/