4 ms·

I've never been so excited for an unstable release. 1.9.2's require was painfully slow without the patch. edit: by "unstable", I mean a dot.uneven number.

• jstepien 15y ago
  A 'point release' might be the phrase you are looking for.
  • sirn 15y ago
    Actually, Ruby used to follows the "unstable odd, stable even" versioning scheme but they seems to quit doing that since 1.9.1 (since both 1.9.1 and 1.9.2 are declared stable[1]) [1]: http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/326276 http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-talk/... EDIT: provide a source about Ruby 1.9.1
    • cmer 15y ago
      Good to know! I didn't realize 1.9.1 was considered stable.
      • wmoxam 15y ago
        Similarly, 1.8.7 is the stable version of the 1.8 series.
• sandal 15y ago
  1.9.3 is not an unstable release. Ruby uses the third version number to represent a point release, i.e. you can expect 1.9.3 to be more stable than 1.9.2 over time. I think that the versioning policy did work the way you describe it at one point, but it's no longer the case.
  • judofyr 15y ago
    As far as I know, x.y.ODD (e.g. 1.8.5) was never an unstable release. x.ODD.z (e.g. 1.7.1) was unstable up until 1.9 though.