Re: Mail_IMAP 2.0.0 alpha 1

Bertrand Mansion wrote:

Richard York wrote:

As far as you being in trouble with all the BC breaks, I dunno, 1.1.0 is about to become stable. I suggest that you continue to use that version :).

So you mean, you will make Mail_IMAP2 before going stable on Mail_IMAP1. If you want my opinion, this really sucks.

I never said that. I am currently working on 2.0.0, but I haven't decided when I will release it nor when I will release 1.1.0 stable, nor how I will handle the differences between the two. If you don't like Mail_IMAP 2.0.0, then don't use the package. I don't understand where your dissent is coming from. I think I'm being more than flexible with being willing to continue maintaining the 1.x.x release for BC. I have no bugs filed on 1.1.0RC2, so there is nothing to do to it. 1.1.0RC2 will be 1.1.0 stable in a couple of weeks if no bug reports come in. I don't think that just because Mail_IMAP 1.1.0 is not yet stable that I should cease to innovate on the package. This class is smaller and integrates features that people have been asking for. Finally, "this sucks" isn't what I was going for when I requested comments on the code and the new API. And my intention is not to cram the new package down everyone's throat. I don't expect everyone using Mail_IMAP to just up and change their applications to fit Mail_IMAP 2.0.0. Furthermore, my time is limited. I have other projects and obligations and no time for being counter-productive with your flames. Regards, Richard York -- ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: The Spicy Peanut Project http://www.spicypeanut.net :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::