[#64210] Asking for clarification for exception handling usage — Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas <rr.rosas@...>
I've created a ticket for that but didn't get any feedback so I decided
[#64517] Fw: Re: Ruby and Rails to become Apache Incubator Project — Tetsuya Kitahata <kitahata@99.alumni.u-tokyo.ac.jp>
What do you think? >> Ruby developers
What benefits are there to this? I have a feeling that adding unnecessary
On Sat, 23 Aug 2014 22:43:46 -0700
Here I am a Japanese. Before moving anywhere else answer to our question first: what benefits?
tax issue with each other.
Forgot to assert my opinions:
[#64614] cowspace (work-in-progress) — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
Hi all, I started working on a cowspace branch. Based on the mspace API
[#64615] [ruby-trunk - Feature #10181] [Open] New method File.openat() — oss-ruby-lang@...
Issue #10181 has been reported by Technorama Ltd..
I like this feature.
On 08/28/2014 02:53 PM, Eric Wong wrote:
Joel VanderWerf <joelvanderwerf@gmail.com> wrote:
On 08/29/2014 12:55 AM, Eric Wong wrote:
Joel VanderWerf <joelvanderwerf@gmail.com> wrote:
[#64627] [ruby-trunk - Feature #10182] [PATCH] string.c: move frozen_strings table to rb_vm_t — ko1@...
Issue #10182 has been updated by Koichi Sasada.
[#64671] Fwd: [ruby-changes:35240] normal:r47322 (trunk): symbol.c (rb_sym2id): do not return garbage object — SASADA Koichi <ko1@...>
Why this fix solve your problem?
(2014/08/30 8:50), SASADA Koichi wrote:
SASADA Koichi <ko1@atdot.net> wrote:
Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net> wrote:
(2014/08/31 0:18), Eric Wong wrote:
[ruby-core:64321] [ruby-trunk - misc #8835] [Closed] Introducing a semantic versioning scheme and branching policy
Issue #8835 has been updated by Hiroshi SHIBATA.
Status changed from Open to Closed
We already applied to use SemVer 'like' versioning after Ruby 2.1.
see also. https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2013/12/21/ruby-version-policy-changes-with-2-1-0/
----------------------------------------
misc #8835: Introducing a semantic versioning scheme and branching policy
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/8835#change-48300
* Author: Akinori MUSHA
* Status: Closed
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: Akinori MUSHA
* Category: misc
* Target version: current: 2.2.0
----------------------------------------
=begin
[This is a presentation for [[ruby:DevelopersMeeting20130831Japan]].]
Ruby's versioning scheme is currently not well defined or well
utilized.
First, RUBY_API_VERSION was introduced in 1.9.1, but has not been
properly maintained since then. There must have been at least a few
ABI incompatible changes (although we tried hard to keep source level
compatibility) and many API additions between 1.9.1 and 1.9.3, but
RUBY_API_VERSION was never bumped.
Secondly, it looks like TEENY version is fixed to zero in the 2.x
series without being used effectively. We often find overlooked
incompatibility or feature bugs after an official release x.y.0, and
would like to fix them in a backward compatible way. I'd suggest we
accept such a situation will happen, and bump TEENY when such a fix
that affects forward compatibility is made. We have up to nine times
of chance for fixing such a situation, and shouldn't be too worried
about running out of digits.
So, here I propose introducing a new versioning scheme as follows,
much with Semantic Versioning (http://semver.org/) in mind:
(1) From 2.1.0 and on, RUBY_API_VERSION shall match RUBY_VERSION.
Giving them different numbers has been a source of confusion, and
introducing this scheme is a way to provide RUBY_VERSION with how to
read API compatibility from the numbers.
(2) MINOR version is incremented when an incompatible API change is
made.
In practice, it is incremented before a change to break
compatibility is actually made. It is when a relatively significant
amount of change is going to be made, which would break
compatibility, or hurts stability for a certain period of time.
Before making such a change, a new stable branch
ruby_{MAJOR}_{MINOR} is cut off from trunk, and MINOR version is
bumped on trunk. MAJOR version may be incremented instead,
resetting MINOR to zero.
On the ruby_{MAJOR}_{MINOR} branch, when the time comes for
prereleasing {MAJOR}.{MINOR}.0, a new branch
ruby_{MAJOR}_{MINOR}_0 is cut off from the ruby_{MAJOR}_{MINOR}
branch.
(3) TEENY version is incremented when functionality is added in a
backward-compatible manner.
It happens on ruby_{MAJOR}_{MINOR} branches, where a new branch
ruby_{MAJOR}_{MINOR}_{TEENY} is cut off when it is released,
resetting PATCHLEVEL to zero.
(4) PATCHLEVEL is initialized to zero on each
ruby_{MAJOR}_{MINOR}_{TEENY} branch where TEENY > 0 on creation,
and incremented every time a change is made on the branch.
On a ruby_{MAJOR}_{MINOR}_0 branch, PATCHLEVEL is kept at -1
during the prerelease period. It is set to zero when
{MAJOR}.{MINOR}.0 is officially released.
On other branches, it is fixed to -1.
Note that MINOR and TEENY need not be bumped every time an applicable
change is made, but once before a new official release is rolled out
from the branch.
With this scheme introduced, version specific library subdirectory
names only need to have {MAJOR}.{MINOR} in it, and user can safely
upgrade ruby to a new teeny version without having to rebuild and
reinstall already installed libraries.
[Figure: Branch Tree]
--o-----------------------o----------(trunk)
\ \
o--o--o--o--(ruby_2_1) o--o--...--(ruby_2_2)
\ \ \ \
\ \ \ o--[v2_2_0_0]--...--(ruby_2_2_0)
\ \ \
\ \ o--[v2_1_2_0]--[v2_1_2_ppp]--...--(ruby_2_1_2)
\ \
\ o--[v2_1_1_0]--[v2_1_1_ppp]--...--(ruby_2_1_1)
\
o--[v2_1_0_0]--[v2_1_0_ppp]--...--(ruby_2_1_0)
=end
---Files--------------------------------
noname (205 Bytes)
noname (205 Bytes)
--
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/