I also keep separate installations of julia: I have both julia-0.3 and julia-0.4 installations in separate directories, with the julia symlink only referring to julia-0.3
-- John On Sep 26, 2014, at 8:12 AM, Steve Kelly <[email protected]> wrote: > This is how I set up my environment to stay involved: > > julia -> master > julia3 -> release-0.3 > julia4on3-> use 0.4 packages on julia3 (this is helpful since I like to > develop in the v0.4 directory) > julia-multi -> run something with 0.4 packages on julia and julia3 (I > normally only use this with 'julia-multi ./test/runtests.jl') > > I've put the scripts I use for the last two on Github: > https://github.com/sjkelly/julia_scripts > > These four commands give me the satisfaction of seeing stuff break, and also > providing comfort when there are deadlines to meet :P. > > > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Stefan Karpinski > <[email protected]> wrote: > It's a bit odd for there to be simultaneous complaints about 0.4 being > unstable (ie under rapid development) and not going anywhere. It's been, > what, 13 years since the plans to release Perl 6 were announced? Seems a bit > early to worry about that kind of problem a couple of months after the last > significant release of Julia. If 0.4 isn't out by 2020 we can start to worry. > > > On Sep 26, 2014, at 10:12 AM, John Myles White <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hans, >> >> The tone of your e-mail is a little odd in my opinion. It seems to imply >> distrust and even possibly anger for a project that would be substantially >> better served by participating actively in the issue discussions that Tim >> Holy discussed. I don't think anyone who's following 0.4's progress would >> ever believe that 0.4 is not on track. >> >> -- John >> >> On Sep 26, 2014, at 3:30 AM, Hans W Borchers <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Ivar, >>> >>> thanks for this clarification; I was really under the impression that -- >>> like >>> for Perl and other projects -- I might never ever again hear from a Julia >>> 0.4 >>> version. >>> >>> A question I asked got buried in another thread and never answered, so I'd >>> like >>> to repeat it here: >>> >>> Will the NEWS.md file immediately document the (disruptive or >>> non-disruptive) >>> changes? That would be very helpful, even if the change is withdrawn >>> later on. >>> Also, every NEWS entry could include a date to make it easier to follow >>> the >>> development. >>> >>> By the way, I am a bit worried about some of the names that seem to come up >>> in a >>> next version of Julia. For example, 'Nullable' or 'NullableArray' sound >>> strange >>> for me in a technical computing environment. >>> >>> >>> On Friday, September 26, 2014 9:19:37 AM UTC+2, Ivar Nesje wrote: >>> I think this is a too strong statement. There are definitely happening a >>> lot on the master (0.4-dev) branch, but it should be quite usable even >>> without reading the majority of Github issues. The more users we have, the >>> earlier concerns is raised, and the earlier we can fix them and prepare for >>> the final release. You should definitely avoid master on any project with a >>> deadline tough. >>> >>> >> >
