If 2.0 is just a lot compatible iteration of 1.9.3, and could just as easily
be called 1.9.4, then why not just call it 1.9.4? Using the 2.0 version jump
implies a substantial bump in the language, with changes in api's and
compatibility. It is the perfect place to clean up things that can not go
into 1.9.4 because the change is too big (such as C API changes, or adding
class boxing). So, to me, it would make sense to release 1.9.4 in early
2012, while developing a roadmap for what 2.0 should include. Then after
1.9.4 is released, we fork to start the 2.0 branch while someone continues
to maintain 1.9.4 (and probably 1.9.3) for bug fixes. This is similar to
what Koichi-san suggested, I believe.

Kirk Haines
On Jul 20, 2011 7:30 PM, "Motohiro KOSAKI" <kosaki.motohiro / gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> Issue #5056 has been updated by Motohiro KOSAKI.
>
>
>>> Sorry, I don't get it. "2.0 is one of 1.9 series" ? Please explain a
bit.
>>>
>>> But I really want this topic to be concise. Thank you.
>>>
>>> 風呂敷広げて議論が発散するのは勘弁してください。
>>
>>There are two principles of Ruby 2.0; in short,
>>* 2.0 is much different from 1.9.3
>>* 2.0 is not different from 1.9.3 so much
>>
>>On latter one, 2.0 is one of 1.9.x series and we don't need neither
ruby_1_9 branch and this >thread.
>>
>>So first of all we should decide what is the 2.0.
>>Current my understanding is, Ruby 2.0 is the one we release in 2012.
>
> OK, I've caught your point and I like this. I would suggest
>
> - 1.9.4 will be released in early 2012. It has only small update.
> because development time is smaller than 1.9.[123].
> - 2.0 will be released in 2013 Feb. it's good candidate because ruby was
born at Feb 24 1993.
> - 2.0 don't have any incompatibility
> - no ruby_1_9 branch
> - keep "release once per a year" rule
> - 3.0 may have API change, but it's 2015 or later
>
> Thought?
>
> ----------------------------------------
> Feature #5056: About 1.9 EOL
> http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/5056
>
> Author: Shyouhei Urabe
> Status: Assigned
> Priority: Normal
> Assignee: Yukihiro Matsumoto
> Category: Project
> Target version: 2.0
>
>
> =begin
>
> At RubyKaigi, I was surprised to hear Matz saying "there will be no
> 1.9.4 because it becomes 2.0".
>
> Question 1: are you kidding? or seriously speaking?
>
> Question 2: do you have plan(s) for making 1.9 branch just like we
> have 1.8 branch now? or the whole 1.9 series just die when 2.0
> development starts?
>
> Question 3: who take care of the 2.0 branch? and who for 1.9 (if any)?
> Currently yugui is the mentor of 1.9 series. Does she shift to 2.0
> mentor and new 1.9 person to appear, or she remains to 1.9 and new one
> for 2.0?
>
> =end
>
>
>
> --
> http://redmine.ruby-lang.org
>