1 Apr
2010
1 Apr
'10
11:23 p.m.
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 11:27 PM, Don Stewart
Parsec98 is kind of a cool name, actually.
-- Don
Back to this - Currently, there's a problem with two versions of parsec being in use at the same time, and there is a real desire and need for the low-complexity parsec-2.1. If we fork and put parsec-2.1 into a parsec98 package, we could then submit that for inclusion into the platform, and continue offering parsec-3 for folks that want the complexity/features. So yes? No? Would anyone prefer that we fork parsec-3 off instead? -Antoine