Replies: 2 comments
-
Yes, I would also add:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
From #226: unify (and document) constructor names |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
I decided to note a couple of ideas here of what we can/could/should do in January. Sometime in the future, this can be converted to separate issues or a github project or whatever.
To me, it feels like xDSL is starting to go towards its v1.0 release. The fundamental data structures are there and, with the xDSL paper being submitted, we will (hopefully) get a big stage next summer. It would be really cool if we could say that xDSLv1.0 has been released in this presentation and is ready for use.
I feel the January meeting should be the start of the process towards that. Now, what is there left todo. IMO, there are a couple of things:
I feel that it would be cool if we could addresse/solve the first three in this meeting. The exact action points can be developed further, closer to the meeting.
Also, towards a v1.0 release means that there will be more light on xDSL as a whole. Therefore, I feel that we want to be sure about the design of data strutures and everything as there will be higher cost related to this after the 1.0 release.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions