On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 8:27 PM, Suraj Kurapati <sunaku / gmail.com> wrote:
>
> What is an "unfinished" gem?  ¨Βθατ¬ ασιδζςον ±®°®φεςσιο> number, really makes a gem "finished"?

Feature-completeness. Whatever I say is finished.

> I don't understand why a "1.0" (or "Big One" as you say) release is
> given such overwhelming importance in open-source software.

It usually means that the author considers her work done. It does
everything it is supposed to do, is free from bugs, and doesn't
require further work. That's the theory, anyway.

> I really hope that we (open-source developers) put aside the need to
> productize our open-source software like commercial software is,
> overcome the stigma of "high" version numbers, and learn to accept
> that change is the life-blood of open-source software: it is never
> really "finished", is it?  ¨Βξδ χιτθουςεηυμαναιξτεξαξγε¬ ιτ χιμμ
> age, rot, and fall into obscurity. :-(

Commercial software and open source are not opposites. See, for
example, RedHat and Novell, or Citrix' XenServer. Or, in fact, the BSD
license and GPL.

-- 
Phillip Gawlowski

twitter.com/phgaw
phgaw.posterous.com

A method of solution is perfect if we can forsee from the start,
and even prove, that following that method we shall attain our aim.
- Leibniz