From: Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@...>
Date: 2009-02-13T08:36:22+09:00
Subject: Re: If you are unhappy with the direction of Ruby 1.8.7+, respond

Hi,

In message "Re: If you are unhappy with the direction of Ruby 1.8.7+, respond"
    on Fri, 13 Feb 2009 02:10:41 +0900, Stefan Lang <perfectly.normal.hacker@gmail.com> writes:

|What do you mean with "Hash ordering"?
|An order for Hash instances? Hash doesn't define a <=> method.
|Or iteration order of Hash elements? That wasn't defined
|in 1.8.6 (I don't know if it is in 1.8.7).

I think he relied on the version/implementation specific behavior, so
1.8.7 HELPED to find a bug in HIS code, unless I am wrong in any ways.
Any other example of 1.8.7 incompatibility?

I am not happy with FUD-like attitude against 1.8.7.  From my point of
view, 1.8.7 is a good release with unfortunate beginning.  There are
slight incompatibility, but every past releases also had some sort of
incompatibilities as well.  I'd like to use 1.8.7 to write new 1.8
code.

It might be true that number of "enterprisey" Ruby users have grown
beyond our expectation, and we might need to keep "maintained stable
snapshot of the past version", which happen to be 1.8.6, for existing
code base, that's OK.  We ARE keeping.  If we want to keep it after
1.8.8 is out (in whatever state), we will need a volunteer to replace
Shyouhei.

EngineYard raised their hands for 1.8.6 maintainer.  It's OK.  I am
not sure when we pass the role, now or future.  In any case, we have
to discuss 1.8.6 maintenance policy.  Let's move to ruby-core.

							matz.