-1 I'm going to rain on the parade. I like consistent versioning and skipping versions is not consistent. Why not 2.999 or 2.9999999 then?
- Keith > On May 20, 2018, at 10:01 AM, Cédric Champeau <cedric.champ...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > +1 but alternatively, we could just skip 2.6 and go straight to 3.0. > > Le dim. 20 mai 2018 à 15:25, mg <mg...@arscreat.com > <mailto:mg...@arscreat.com>> a écrit : > 2.9.0 could make people ask themselves where 2.6/2.7/2.8 went, whereas 2.97 > is so far from 2.5, that I think people would get that it means more "3.0 > minus small, but (significant) delta" (i.e. not just an epsilon, as with > 2.99, which Russel suggested). Plus the "7" has a mnemonic quality, making it > easier for everyone to remember what the main point of this release was... > > (2.9 would be much better than 2.6, though...) > > > -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -------- > Von: Andres Almiray <aalmi...@gmail.com <mailto:aalmi...@gmail.com>> > Datum: 20.05.18 15:11 (GMT+01:00) > An: dev@groovy.apache.org <mailto:dev@groovy.apache.org> > Cc: pa...@asert.com.au <mailto:pa...@asert.com.au> > Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Renumber Groovy 2.6 to 2.9 > > I’d suggest to keep it simple, go with 2.9.0. > > Sent from my primitive Tricorder > > On 20 May 2018, at 21:50, mg <mg...@arscreat.com <mailto:mg...@arscreat.com>> > wrote: > >> What about 2.97 ? Incorporates a JDK 7 reference, and is not too close to >> 3.0 (Bugfixes could go into 2.97.1 etc..., so the "7" could be kept). >> >> -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -------- >> Von: Russel Winder <rus...@winder.org.uk <mailto:rus...@winder.org.uk>> >> Datum: 20.05.18 12:26 (GMT+01:00) >> An: pa...@asert.com.au <mailto:pa...@asert.com.au>, dev@groovy.apache.org >> <mailto:dev@groovy.apache.org> >> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Renumber Groovy 2.6 to 2.9 >> >> On Sun, 2018-05-20 at 13:58 +1000, Paul King wrote: >> > Hi, >> > >> > I was wondering what people thought about renumbering Groovy 2.6 to 2.9. >> > It is only a subtle change but I think better conveys that it isn't a small >> > step up >> > from 2.5 but rather something just a bit short of 3. >> > >> >> If it is to be the last 2.X release why not 2.99 to make it more "in your >> face"? >> >> -- >> Russel. >> ========================================== >> Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 >> 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 >> London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk <http://www.russel.org.uk/> ---------------------- Keith Suderman Research Associate Department of Computer Science Vassar College, Poughkeepsie NY suder...@cs.vassar.edu
