groovy-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Keith Suderman <suder...@anc.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Renumber Groovy 2.6 to 2.9
Date Sun, 20 May 2018 14:28:21 GMT
-1

I'm going to rain on the parade.  I like consistent versioning and skipping versions is not
consistent.  Why not 2.999 or 2.9999999 then?

- Keith


> On May 20, 2018, at 10:01 AM, Cédric Champeau <cedric.champeau@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> +1 but alternatively, we could just skip 2.6 and go straight to 3.0.
> 
> Le dim. 20 mai 2018 à 15:25, mg <mgbiz@arscreat.com <mailto:mgbiz@arscreat.com>>
a écrit :
> 2.9.0 could make people ask themselves where 2.6/2.7/2.8 went, whereas 2.97 is so far
from 2.5, that I think people would get that it means more "3.0 minus small, but (significant)
delta" (i.e. not just an epsilon, as with 2.99, which Russel suggested). Plus the "7" has
a mnemonic quality, making it easier for everyone to remember what the main point of this
release was...
> 
> (2.9 would be much better than 2.6, though...)
> 
> 
> -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------
> Von: Andres Almiray <aalmiray@gmail.com <mailto:aalmiray@gmail.com>>
> Datum: 20.05.18 15:11 (GMT+01:00)
> An: dev@groovy.apache.org <mailto:dev@groovy.apache.org>
> Cc: paulk@asert.com.au <mailto:paulk@asert.com.au>
> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Renumber Groovy 2.6 to 2.9
> 
> I’d suggest to keep it simple, go with 2.9.0. 
> 
> Sent from my primitive Tricorder
> 
> On 20 May 2018, at 21:50, mg <mgbiz@arscreat.com <mailto:mgbiz@arscreat.com>>
wrote:
> 
>> What about 2.97 ? Incorporates a JDK 7 reference, and is not too close to 3.0 (Bugfixes
could go into 2.97.1 etc..., so the "7" could be kept).
>> 
>> -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------
>> Von: Russel Winder <russel@winder.org.uk <mailto:russel@winder.org.uk>>
>> Datum: 20.05.18 12:26 (GMT+01:00)
>> An: paulk@asert.com.au <mailto:paulk@asert.com.au>, dev@groovy.apache.org <mailto:dev@groovy.apache.org>
>> Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Renumber Groovy 2.6 to 2.9
>> 
>> On Sun, 2018-05-20 at 13:58 +1000, Paul King wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> > 
>> > I was wondering what people thought about renumbering Groovy 2.6 to 2.9.
>> > It is only a subtle change but I think better conveys that it isn't a small
>> > step up
>> > from 2.5 but rather something just a bit short of 3.
>> > 
>> 
>> If it is to be the last 2.X release why not 2.99 to make it more "in your
>> face"?
>> 
>> -- 
>> Russel.
>> ==========================================
>> Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200
>> 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077
>> London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk <http://www.russel.org.uk/>



----------------------
Keith Suderman
Research Associate
Department of Computer Science
Vassar College, Poughkeepsie NY
suderman@cs.vassar.edu





Mime
View raw message