4 ms·

Add 0.1 already to make it 2.0 People like big increments, new versions, cool stuff to play with. It is all about marketing. Like HTML 5, it's new and fun. It

Add 0.1 already to make it 2.0 People like big increments, new versions, cool stuff to play with. It is all about marketing. Like HTML 5, it's new and fun. It wouldn't be the same if it was HTML 4.1.5 Firefox should have been 4.0 instead of 3.5, it has more punch. Next version would be 5.0 and so on. But they missed it. Now we have Safari 4, Opera 10, Chrome 2. Small increments are always associated with bug fixes. Stop coding and start marketing.

Oompa 17y ago
Not to mention, when I got into Ruby, 1.9 was seen as a developer only release, then suddenly it got upgraded to "stable" and was meant for everyone.
- jballanc 17y ago
  The upgrade wasn't sudden, and happened over 2 years ago. It's about time that this...I don't know if I should call it a rumor or what...stop being repeated. Like many, many software projects, Matz realized that his ambitions for Ruby 2.0 were just a little too grandiose, and so he set 1.9 as the "now" upgrade and 2.0 as the future. Essentially what it breaks down to is that there was a lot of work on making the VM faster (i.e. switching to YARV) and at the same time there was work on some pretty severely back-compat-breaking changes. It became clear that the performance improvements were needed sooner rather than later, and this needed to happen in a way that didn't break backwards compatibility (1.9 really is not that different from 1.8 in the grand scheme of things). Another thing to keep in mind is that, when this decision (that 1.9 should be a "sooner rather than later" performance release) was made, the alternative implementations were not as viable as they are today. I suspect that if JRuby from today was transported back in time to 2 years ago, Matz might have said "Use JRuby while I work on 2.0"...
jballanc 17y ago
There is a long tradition of 0.5 increases for "less than full rev but more than bug-fix": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning#Apple_2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning#Apple_2
sailormoon 17y ago
http://fukamachi.org/wp/2008/06/23/ruby-versioning-is-completely-fucked-up/ http://fukamachi.org/wp/2008/06/23/ruby-versioning-is-comple...
jrockway 17y ago
At least the Ruby community didn't take the next positive integer and use it to name a pie-in-the-sky research project, condemning the production version to forever be "5".

Oompa 17y ago

Not to mention, when I got into Ruby, 1.9 was seen as a developer only release, then suddenly it got upgraded to "stable" and was meant for everyone.

jballanc 17y ago
The upgrade wasn't sudden, and happened over 2 years ago. It's about time that this...I don't know if I should call it a rumor or what...stop being repeated. Like many, many software projects, Matz realized that his ambitions for Ruby 2.0 were just a little too grandiose, and so he set 1.9 as the "now" upgrade and 2.0 as the future. Essentially what it breaks down to is that there was a lot of work on making the VM faster (i.e. switching to YARV) and at the same time there was work on some pretty severely back-compat-breaking changes. It became clear that the performance improvements were needed sooner rather than later, and this needed to happen in a way that didn't break backwards compatibility (1.9 really is not that different from 1.8 in the grand scheme of things). Another thing to keep in mind is that, when this decision (that 1.9 should be a "sooner rather than later" performance release) was made, the alternative implementations were not as viable as they are today. I suspect that if JRuby from today was transported back in time to 2 years ago, Matz might have said "Use JRuby while I work on 2.0"...

jballanc 17y ago

There is a long tradition of 0.5 increases for "less than full rev but more than bug-fix": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning#Apple_2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning#Apple_2

sailormoon 17y ago

http://fukamachi.org/wp/2008/06/23/ruby-versioning-is-completely-fucked-up/ http://fukamachi.org/wp/2008/06/23/ruby-versioning-is-comple...

jrockway 17y ago

At least the Ruby community didn't take the next positive integer and use it to name a pie-in-the-sky research project, condemning the production version to forever be "5".