This is a big deal. For those unfamiliar with Flask, it's a great library but has been sitting on 0.10 for three years now.
Blog post about it: https://www.palletsprojects.com/blog/flask-011-released/
Blog post about it: https://www.palletsprojects.com/blog/flask-011-released/
It's been sitting for three years because it was just working and given it's minimal nature, there were not many things that should be changed. So not much point to make a release.
For another, any bugfixes/improvements that had been requested by the community were inaccessible on a release branch, even after they were committed – this sounds extremely frustrating.
Most libraries out there are "just working" – doesn't mean they can't ship improvements, and most do – typically no more irregularly than every 6mo.
That's a very weird thing to say in response to somebody saying, "improvements were needed and made but not released".
> Furthermore, the repo is out there.
Now that's just ridiculous. If somebody wants to not have releases, that's fine. E.g., rbenv plugins just seem to be "pull latest from git". But if somebody is going to have releases, then it's absurd to say: "Hey, if you want this to actually work, don't use the release that all the docs tell you to use; instead build the thing we have explicitly not given to you."
Having releases: good. Not ever having releases: good. Having them but not using them: worst of both worlds.
pip install git+https://github.com/pallets/flask.git
The general discussion of release philosophy could be interesting. If you would like to talk about that, you should start a new topic, or at the very least make it clear you're changing the topic. When you reply to somebody's specific statements with sweeping generalities, as you did here, it looks like contradiction.
All the new features/fixes, contributions finally being released, the increase in development activity, it's all bullshit, people only care about the digits.
Sigh. You're projecting.