pat eyler wrote:
On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 12:58 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
- We need to consider what version number we might want for
JRuby.next...1.2? 2.0? Tom suggested 3.0 since it wouldn't confuse people
about JRuby 2.0/Ruby 2.0. I think it's open for discussion.
I'd go with 1.2 ... if you skip 2.0 to avoid name confusion, what will you do
when Ruby 2.0 does hit the streets and you want to start working towards
feature compatiblity with it?
JRuby's likely to always have 1.8, 1.9 and eventually 2.0 features all
in the same codebase, since it's not especially hard to do so. So I
don't think we'll be tracking Ruby's version numbers in any way, but we
may want to avoid the 2.0 moniker. I dunno, it's a toss up. Some of the
work planned for this next cycle is going to be pretty invasive...and
there may be backward-incompatible fixes to Java integration. That says
2.0 to me.
- Charlie
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
