[#48745] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7267][Open] Dir.glob on Mac OS X returns unexpected string encodings for unicode file names — "kennygrant (Kenny Grant)" <kennygrant@...>

17 messages 2012/11/02

[#48773] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7269][Open] Refinement doesn't work if using locate after method — "ko1 (Koichi Sasada)" <redmine@...>

12 messages 2012/11/03

[#48847] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7274][Open] UnboundMethods should be bindable to any object that is_a?(owner of the UnboundMethod) — "rits (First Last)" <redmine@...>

21 messages 2012/11/04

[#48854] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7276][Open] TestFile#test_utime failure — "jonforums (Jon Forums)" <redmine@...>

14 messages 2012/11/04

[#48988] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7292][Open] Enumerable#to_h — "marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune)" <ruby-core@...>

40 messages 2012/11/06

[#48997] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7297][Open] map_to alias for each_with_object — "nathan.f77 (Nathan Broadbent)" <nathan.f77@...>

19 messages 2012/11/06

[#49001] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7298][Open] Behavior of Enumerator.new different between 1.9.3 and 2.0.0 — "ayumin (Ayumu AIZAWA)" <ayumu.aizawa@...>

12 messages 2012/11/06

[#49018] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7299][Open] Ruby should not completely ignore blocks. — "marcandre (Marc-Andre Lafortune)" <ruby-core@...>

13 messages 2012/11/07

[#49044] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7304][Open] Random test failures around test_autoclose_true_closed_by_finalizer — "luislavena (Luis Lavena)" <luislavena@...>

11 messages 2012/11/07

[#49196] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7322][Open] Add a new operator name #>< for bit-wise "exclusive or" — "alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)" <redmine@...>

18 messages 2012/11/10

[#49211] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7328][Open] Move ** operator precedence under unary + and - — "boris_stitnicky (Boris Stitnicky)" <boris@...>

20 messages 2012/11/11

[#49229] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7331][Open] Set the precedence of unary `-` equal to the precedence `-`, same for `+` — "alexeymuranov (Alexey Muranov)" <redmine@...>

17 messages 2012/11/11

[#49256] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7336][Open] Flexiable OPerator Precedence — "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" <transfire@...>

18 messages 2012/11/12

[#49354] review open pull requests on github — Zachary Scott <zachary@...>

Could we get a review on any open pull requests on github before the

12 messages 2012/11/15
[#49355] Re: review open pull requests on github — "NARUSE, Yui" <naruse@...> 2012/11/15

2012/11/15 Zachary Scott <zachary@zacharyscott.net>:

[#49356] Re: review open pull requests on github — Zachary Scott <zachary@...> 2012/11/15

Ok, I was hoping one of the maintainers might want to.

[#49451] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7374][Open] File.expand_path resolving to first file/dir instead of absolute path — mdube@... (Martin Dubé) <mdube@...>

12 messages 2012/11/16

[#49463] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7375][Open] embedding libyaml in psych for Ruby 2.0 — "tenderlovemaking (Aaron Patterson)" <aaron@...>

21 messages 2012/11/16
[#49494] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7375] embedding libyaml in psych for Ruby 2.0 — "vo.x (Vit Ondruch)" <v.ondruch@...> 2012/11/17

[#49467] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7377][Open] #indetical? as an alias for #equal? — "aef (Alexander E. Fischer)" <aef@...>

13 messages 2012/11/17

[#49558] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7395][Open] Negative numbers can't be primes by definition — "zzak (Zachary Scott)" <zachary@...>

10 messages 2012/11/19

[#49566] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7400][Open] Incorporate OpenSSL tests from JRuby. — "zzak (Zachary Scott)" <zachary@...>

11 messages 2012/11/19

[#49770] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7414][Open] Now that const_get supports "Foo::Bar" syntax, so should const_defined?. — "robertgleeson (Robert Gleeson)" <rob@...>

9 messages 2012/11/20

[#49950] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7427][Assigned] Update Rubygems — "mame (Yusuke Endoh)" <mame@...>

17 messages 2012/11/24

[#50043] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7429][Open] Provide options for core collections to customize behavior — "headius (Charles Nutter)" <headius@...>

10 messages 2012/11/24

[#50092] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7434][Open] Allow caller_locations and backtrace_locations to receive negative params — "sam.saffron (Sam Saffron)" <sam.saffron@...>

21 messages 2012/11/25

[#50094] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7436][Open] Allow for a "granularity" flag for backtrace_locations — "sam.saffron (Sam Saffron)" <sam.saffron@...>

11 messages 2012/11/25

[#50207] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7445][Open] strptime('%s %z') doesn't work — "felipec (Felipe Contreras)" <felipe.contreras@...>

19 messages 2012/11/27

[#50424] [ruby-trunk - Bug #7485][Open] ruby cannot build on mingw32 due to missing __sync_val_compare_and_swap — "drbrain (Eric Hodel)" <drbrain@...7.net>

15 messages 2012/11/30

[#50429] [ruby-trunk - Feature #7487][Open] Cutting through the issues with Refinements — "trans (Thomas Sawyer)" <transfire@...>

13 messages 2012/11/30

[ruby-core:49656] [Ruby 1.8 - Feature #4239] Let's begin a talk for "1.8.8" -- How's needed for surviving 1.8?

From: "wing (wing blair)" <yhj.delia@...>
Date: 2012-11-20 06:33:20 UTC
List: ruby-core #49656
Issue #4239 has been updated by wing (wing blair).


http://www.facebook.com/idateasiapage
http://twitter.com/idateasia
http://about.me/idateasia
http://asianbeauties.jux.com/
http://www.pheed.com/asianbeauties

----------------------------------------
Feature #4239: Let's begin a talk for "1.8.8" -- How's needed for surviving 1.8?
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/4239#change-33173

Author: sorah (Shota Fukumori)
Status: Assigned
Priority: Normal
Assignee: shyouhei (Shyouhei Urabe)
Category: core
Target version: Ruby 1.8.8


=begin
 ###########################
 # This issue is translated from #4207.
 # For Japanese: This translation needs proofreading. If you have a patch, please send to sorah[at]tubusu[dot]net.
 # Newer version of translation available at: https://gist.github.com/b2c4f223d3ee0bca72ad
 ###########################
 
 # http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/4207
 = Let's begin a talk for "1.8.8" -- How's needed for surviving 1.8?
 
 Hi,
 
 I know that we cannot release ruby_1_8 branch... more than anyone.
 
 But the time past 3 years from 1.9.0, and 2.5 years from 1.8.7;
 it will be turned to 3 years in June 2011.
 
 Why I'm marking "3 years," because releasing interval over 3 years
 first time ever, and almost systems have revised after 3 years from
 developed in my experience... so, almost codes which targets 1.8.7
 preparing to revised; I think.
 
 Well, Which version used when codes which targets 1.8.7 are revised,
 I recommend 1.9.2 on my post, but almost can't use 1.9.x in
 actuality. Like, Extension libraries doesn't work. 
 When can't use 1.9.x in codes, so it means use only 1.8.7. but it is
 really tough, for making tasks with 1.8.7, and I think that when I 
 can give up maintaining 1.8.7? when my motivation is decreasing in
 future, it won't increase again. So I want to use new version,
 and don't use 1.8.7. New codes must target newer versions.
 
 So, I want to set directions about 1.8.x future. I'm considing that
 destroy ruby_1_8 branch and we won't release 1.8.8 for a one of
 ideas. If we won't release 1.8.8, it means that can publish
 announcement about 1.8.7 is last version of 1.8 branch,then 1.8
 goes to last maintainance release. ah, in simplicity developers
 task is decreased; developers will be happy.
 
 P.S.: I hope that people in a posision like Endoh Yusuke at 1.9.2.
 Anyone?
 
 ###
 # http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/show/4207#note-6
 
 Well, Organize this issue without my factors, currently we have the following
 issues of 1.8.8.
 
 * the time past 3 years from 1.9.0 released. In last 3 years, We released
   1.9.2 smoothly at 1.9 branch. Thanks Yugui (Yuki Sonoda).
   Also many users are using 1.9.x at forms of RailsDevCon.
   http://railsdevcon.jp/RailsDevCon2010report.pdf
 * 1.8.8 (and 1.8.7?) is on migration step to 1.9, but if we continue
   developing 1.8.8 at this rate and release 1.8.8 in 2020, do users which
   haven't migrated to 1.9 exist?
 * Currently does ruby_1_8 include any prompting structures to migrate
   1.9.x more than 1.8.7 at all? Just not merged same patches as 1.9?
 * "I want to release so I release. Any users didn't effect." is a one of
   views, but it makes unhappy by recognition differences?
 
 So.. Because 1.8 mustn't let be uncontrolled,
   I propose the following ideas which possible:
 
 1. Not today but ASAP, release 1.8.8 as "better 1.8.7." Release goal is this
    Summer.
 2. Develop 1.8.8 until it's approached to ideal. Users can't be affect.
    Release goal is 2020 Christmas.
 3. We won't release 1.8.8 never. Drop.
 4. Otherwise I haven't thought yet.
 
 I don't specify any idea for adoption.
 Anyhow, I think that 1.8 mustn't keep current principle, so I asking "What do we do?"
 
 Well.. what do we do?
=end



-- 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/

In This Thread

Prev Next