The rate of change slowed, but then, as we get closer to 1.0, the rate of change has sped back up again. We need to break as many things as possible as soon as possible, so that we can give the community some time to try it out before we christen a 1.0 release. Does that make sense?
Seems to me like you need at least a year before beginning to think about releasing 1.0.
Naw. The language itself is getting smaller and smaller over time. Most breaking changes these days (though not all!) are in libraries, which have individual stability markers, and the stability of the standard library doesn't block 1.0.
A year is a very, very, very long time in software. Why do you suggest that long? I'm curious.
Possibly so of you break something in a bad way, you have time to find out, break it again, and then make sure that change is a good one.