Is the intention to switch to a rapid major release cycle like Windows, Java, etc ? If yes: Shouldn't we then call the next major release Groovy 18 (or 19, depending on year of release) ?Could also be:groovy 2.6 -> groovy 18.0groovy 3.0 -> groovy 19.0What exactly would be in 4.0 ? Going to 4.0 quickly after 3.0 seems to devalue to me what an old school major release encompasses/means (with regards to expectations/press coverage/etc)... (?)-------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------Von: Cédric Champeau <firstname.lastname@example.org>Datum: 22.05.18 13:31 (GMT+01:00)Cc: Paul King <email@example.com>Betreff: Re: 2.5.0-rc-3Yeah. Doesn't prevent us from having a quick 4.0 with module revamp if we're extremely good :)Le mar. 22 mai 2018 à 13:29, Jesper Steen Møller <firstname.lastname@example.org> a écrit :And postpone module revamp?-JesperOn 22 May 2018, at 13.27, Cédric Champeau <email@example.com> wrote:I think we should slim down what Groovy 3 is, make it Parrot + JDK 8 basically.Le mar. 22 mai 2018 à 13:22, Paul King <firstname.lastname@example.org> a écrit :The question is really (most of) Parrot on JDK7+ or Parrot on JDK8+ sooner.On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 7:55 PM, Daniel.Sun <email@example.com> wrote:As a user, if you ask me whether I need the Parrot or not, my answer will
always be yes even if I seldom use it ;-)
Sent from: http://groovy.329449.n5.