On 10 June 2011 01:44, Thomas E Enebo <tom.en...@gmail.com> wrote:
> A JRuby version 2 is like to be confusing. We may not pick 2 since it
> may confuse all the folks who think we are tracking MRI version
> numbers. Likewise 1.8 and 1.9 will probably be avoided for the same
> reason. We have been talking about this subject for years now and
> have not totally decided, but I think that is the current consensus.
>
I think the ubuntu-style date versions aren't a bad idea.
e.g.
If the next release is in august, it would be JRuby-11.08 or JRuby-201108
Version numbers are really just temporal solidification markers in a
moving stream of code, and yet people read too much into them (e.g.
the linux version 3.0 drama/non-event). I remember you and charlie
talking about the mythical 2.0 release when everything is set right in
the world, cats and dogs lie down together, and we finally throw the
ring into Mount Doom, etc for at least 4 years.
I don't think a big-change-the-world version bump will happen - it
will be too painful for people, but I think people can deal with
occasional breakages that are communicated well better than a lot of
breakages at once.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
