* Trevor Parscal <[email protected]> [Tue, 6 Dec 2011 17:21:43 -0800]: > The hype of "2.0" aside, is there a guideline for what should constitute > a > major version number change? > > It looks like we are doing something like: Major.Minor.Release > > 1.18 = Major: 1, Minor: 18, (alpha|beta|etc.) > > I'm just curious what people think would constitue a major version. > We've > certainly had major rewrites of systems in the past that didn't seem to > justify a version bump. Is there anything wrong with having version > 1.249? > Is there a practical reason for bumping the version at some point (like > when the minor version hits tripple digits)? > > Also, a rewrite of MediaWiki should for sure be done in Node.js :) > > - Trevor > Is Javascript really that good? Some people dislike prototypical inheritance, it seems that jQuery prefers to use wrappers instead (that's a kind of suboptimal architecture). Also, Google had some complains about Javascript flaws (for example primitive types don't allow high performance available in Java / C#), suggesting to replace it with something else.. Although having common clientside / serverside codebase is nice thing, for sure. And there's nothing more widespread than Javascript at client side. Also, it's object side is strong (something like Lisp with C-syntax), however it does not have generics, named parameters etc.. Dmitriy
_______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
