Next words are just my humble opinion (from “nobody” in Julia community) and I am open to change my mind!
Something similar to this, that Julia has some performance issue or not excellent user experience or lack of functionality could be seen relatively often. (problems that have issue open several years are relatively often too)
The next milestone (planned as 1.0) is for language stability - means no breaking changes for some (longer) time. I feel that it is not version prepared enough for general public audience as general purpose language yet. It is more version for package creators to start working more seriously or to start creating packages…
Next+1 milestone (planned as 1.1?) needs to focus on performance issues and package ecosystem improvement.
There is a little problem that if it will bring bigger performance in some part of language it could bring necessity to rewrite some part of code in packages too (read: brings some kind of breaking change).
What we want is to propagate Julia and releasing 1.0 is good opportunity for advertising. But it is also responsibility to not bring version which could get negative critic.
My humble question (just question I am not sure what is better): couldn’t be good to name next milestone 0.7 (+breaking change tabu) and wait to next+1 milestone for name it 1.0?
Or (this is probably same but maybe more acceptable to thinking about) not announce 1.0 too soon after 0.7?
0.7 - version for package/library creators. For early hackers (or people who see big potential). (“Hacker time investment rating” B-)
1.0 - version for general audience (conservative hackers (significant benefit is present in some domain), BBB+)
1.x (1.1?) - version for selling products based on Julia ((significant benefit is present in some domain), A)
1.y - version for Julia domination (great benefit is present everywhere, AAA++)