From: "Windham, Kristopher R." <kriswindham@...>
Date: 2007-12-27T07:39:21+09:00
Subject: Re: Purpose of Ruby 1.9?

in the Desktop reference by Matz, printed in 2002,
he says ..
  "Developmental releases of Ruby always have an odd minor revision  
number such as 1.5 or 1.7.
Once a developmental release is stable and finalized, it's then  
"promoted" to a stable release. Stable releases always have an even  
minor revision number such as 2.0 or3.2.  Therefore, releases with  
even subversion numbers are stable releases.  Releases with odd  
subversion numbers are developmental versions..."
I assume this is still the case.
Do not ever use a developmental release for production.
As far as intentions for 1.9.x, I will leave that answer to some one  
else.

On Dec 26, 2007, at 4:17 PM, Luiz Vitor Martinez Cardoso wrote:

> You are asking very usefull questions! Well... we need wait to someone
> answer ;)
> Regards,
> Luiz Vitor.
>
> On Dec 26, 2007 6:50 PM, Radosław Bułat <radek.bulat@gmail.com>  
> wrote:
>
>> First of all I want to thank Matz and Ko1 for yours great work! I
>> can't say how much thankful I am for Ruby language.
>>
>> My question is generally to Matz, Ko1 or other Ruby core maintainers.
>> We have Ruby 1.9 already released. Matz says that it's not stable as
>> he expected, so it requires some work to become stable. But what
>> intentions are for Ruby 1.9.x? Is it released mainly for developers
>> and programmers which are very close to language (language, gem
>> maintainers) or it's regular release for production usage? Does Ruby
>> follow unix style for labeling versions? (1.8 stable, 1.9  
>> development,
>> 2.0 stable etc) I've read dissenting opinions of it.
>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Regards,
> Luiz Vitor Martinez Cardoso [Grabber].
> (11) 8187-8662
>
> rubz.org - engineer student at maua.br