From: "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...>
Date: 2011-05-12T09:48:42+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:36124] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4666][Open] set ruby compatibility version to 1.9.3 in trunk

2011/5/12 Urabe Shyouhei <shyouhei@ruby-lang.org>:
>> Even if 1.9.3 is still binary-compatible with 1.9.1, I think that it would be easier to change
>
> Easier to whom? �You? �You know I have compilers so it's 100% OK for me to
> recompile my extension libraries, but I think that's not for everyone --
> especially for Windows users. �Even if a Windows user had a compiler (rare!),
> recompiling an extension lib is painfully slow on that arch. �So it's not
> always "easier".
>
> I know it makes _you_ at ease and I'm not against your motivation. �I hope
> there is a good trade-off.
>
>> - enable users to co-install (1.9.1 or 1.9.2) and 1.9.3. In debian, 1.9.3 could be provided as a separate ruby1.9.3 package.
>
> Why do debian have to provide a distro-standard way to have multiple ruby?
> That is, why you have to retain 1.9.2 installations once after you have 1.9.3?

I agree with Shyouhei.
The confusion seems to be not for CRuby but for debian's package.

You posted the plan of future debian's package in Apr 2010, and I replied to it.
http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-ruby@lists.debian.org/msg00745.html

Those mails described about this issue and you said as following,
and you finally decided that 1.9.2 will be installed as 1.9.1.
> Ah :-) Would be too easy otherwise. Then it's probably better to handle
> the 1.9.1->1.9.2 transition in the same way as the 1.9.0->1.9.1
> transition.

It is your decision, not ours.

-- 
NARUSE, Yui �<naruse@airemix.jp>