On Dec 1, 2007, at 2:38 AM, David A. Black wrote:

> Hi --
>
> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Rick DeNatale wrote:
>
>> On Nov 30, 2007 8:18 AM, David A. Black <dblack / rubypal.com> wrote:
>>> Hi --
>>>
>>> On Fri, 30 Nov 2007, Rick DeNatale wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Nov 29, 2007 11:45 PM, Bil Kleb <Bil.Kleb / nasa.gov> wrote:
>>>>> sayoyo Sayoyo wrote:
>>>>>> Hi, does someone know when the 1.9.0 will be released?
>>>>>
>>>>> Traditionally, these sorts of things are xmas presents.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> --
>>>>> Bil Kleb
>>>>> http://fun3d.larc.nasa.gov
>>>>
>>>> And this Christmas we will get not Ruby 2.0, but Ruby 1.9.1  
>>>> which will
>>>> be the stable release of the 1.9 stream.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure how stable, though. Matz said at RubyConf that it would
>>> come out at Christmas but probably not be as stable as he had hoped.
>>> I think it will be feature-frozen, though, or nearly so.
>>
>> That's how I interpret stable.
>
> My interpretation was with respect to the running of the thing itself
> -- I think what you're calling not production-ready. Anyway, whatever
> the terminology, the signal from Matz seemed to be that 1.9.1 was the
> way of the future, but that its release should not be taken as a sign
> to abandon 1.8, which he still considers the stable (or robust, or
> production-ready) version. But we'll see -- there's still more than
> three weeks before Christmas :-)
>
>
> David
>
It's good to know that 1.8.x is not being abandoned outright. I'd be  
shocked if it were.
There is so much code out there now that is totally dependent upon  
it, and more importantly, from the general sense I've gotten from the  
occasional 1.9 posts here, there are a lot of changes in 1.9 that  
will take some time to get familiar with.
No big deal, but I'd like to wait until there are some published  
books before considering spending time on learning 1.9
Any word on the unicode support in 1.9? Or is that still scheduled as  
a 2.x feature?