On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 10:29 AM, Motohiro KOSAKI
<kosaki.motohiro / gmail.com> wrote:
> =A0- 1.9.4 will be released in early 2012. It has only small update.
> =A0 because development time is smaller than 1.9.[123].
> =A0- 2.0 will be released in 2013 Feb. it's good candidate because ruby w=
as born at Feb 24 1993.
> =A0- 2.0 don't have any incompatibility
> =A0- no ruby_1_9 branch
> =A0- keep "release once per a year" rule
> =A0- 3.0 may have API change, but it's 2015 or later

Basically I agree with Motohiro, except:
> =A0- no ruby_1_9 branch

Ruby 1.9 will be good enough with Ruby 1.9.3.  Ruby 1.9.2 resolved
some contradictive/confusing language designs in Ruby 1.9.1.  Ruby
1.9.3 improved the implementation.  So next, what should we do to make
Ruby better?
* Deprecation of unwanted APIs/features
* Large enhancements, like keyword arguments, refinements or classbox.

Ruby with these changes should be called Ruby 2.0.  Matz is right.
But also these features will take some time.  It cannot be released
within 2012.  So 2013 Feb is a good candidate.


On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 12:54 AM, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz / ruby-lang.org> w=
rote:
> I disagree. =A0Without making a branch, we have to wait 2.0 works until
> we release 1.9.4 in the year 2012.

Yes. We should have a branch.

> =A0- no ruby_1_9 branch
But it can be ruby_1_9_4.  Motohiro is also right. :)

--=20
Yuki Sonoda (Yugui)
yugui / yugui.jp
http://yugui.jp