--- "Sean E. Russell" <ser / germane-software.com>
wrote:

> On Saturday 28 January 2006 17:13, Wilson Bilkovich
> wrote:
> > My opinion is rather extreme: if Ruby is already
> at a point where
> > something in the stdlib can't be improved without
> a fork, it might be
> > time to start shopping for a new language.
> 
> Well, I don't entirely understand this point of
> view, but I think I know what 
> you mean.

<snip>

I understand it completely.  We cannot continue to be
at the mercy of core Ruby where we have to wait a year
just to get improvements in the standard library.

Here's my solution:

- Don't touch REXML in the 1.8 branch.
- Create a REXML project on RubyForge.
- Put the current version out as a download on
RubyForge.
- Put your new version out as a download on RubyForge.
- Create a gem for the current version and the new
version. 
- Call the new version REXML 4.0
- Update the RAA entry.
- Put a big warning sticker on it (in the CHANGES file
or wherever) about backwards compatability (if the
version jump isn't enough).
- Let people download it at their discretion.
- With gems for both, people can explicitly require
the version they want, or not download it at all.

ALL standard library packages should be available
outside of the main distribution as separate
downloads.  Worried about compatibility with the new
version of Ruby?  Run the test suite.  Worried about
compatability within the same library?  Read the
changes file for compatability issues or use gems to
require explicit versions in your code.  That, or
don't download it in the first place.  
   
Regards,

Dan

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com