We should consider staying with the 0.x.x version numbering for a
variety of reasons, but really it boils down to one main reason: Beta
is the new in thing. I’m typing this message from Gmail(beta) Beta
says that you are on the cutting edge, that you’re “with it.”
With futher consideration, I believe that we should further revise the
system to use negative version numbers. This will futher underscore
that Rails is moving in a new direction, one never seen before in the
history of IT. I hope we can come together as a community and label
the next version of Rails " - 0.0.0.15 "
Kyle
And for vaporware - we can use imaginary numbers…
Warren S.
Kyle M. wrote:
We should consider staying with the 0.x.x version numbering for a
variety of reasons, but really it boils down to one main reason: Beta
is the new in thing. I’m typing this message from Gmail(beta) Beta
says that you are on the cutting edge, that you’re “with it.”
With futher consideration, I believe that we should further revise the
system to use negative version numbers. This will futher underscore
that Rails is moving in a new direction, one never seen before in the
history of IT. I hope we can come together as a community and label
the next version of Rails " - 0.0.0.15 "
Kyle
Negative numbers eh? OK, here’s what I think of your idea:
-1 non-stupid non-trendy idea.
Joe
I prefer infinitesimals. Even mathematicians think those are made up.
Zed A. Shaw
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005 02:09:19 +0200
On Mon, 12 Dec 2005, Kyle M. wrote:
We should consider staying with the 0.x.x version numbering for a variety of
reasons, but really it boils down to one main reason: Beta is the new in
thing. I’m typing this message from Gmail(beta) Beta says that you are on
the cutting edge, that you’re “with it.”
With futher consideration, I believe that we should further revise the
system to use negative version numbers. This will futher underscore that
Rails is moving in a new direction, one never seen before in the history of
IT. I hope we can come together as a community and label the next version
of Rails " - 0.0.0.15 "
at the risk of appearing combative - may i ask if you are actively
submitting
patches? if so disregard the following:
let’s not forgot that 1.0, like all the other versions, will be free and
open.
kind regards.
-a
===============================================================================
| ara [dot] t [dot] howard [at] noaa [dot] gov
| all happiness comes from the desire for others to be happy. all misery
| comes from the desire for oneself to be happy.
| – bodhicaryavatara
Is my calendar broken or something? I could have sworn we’ve done
Halloween and Thanksgiving, are getting ready for Christmas and New
Years, and are doing preliminary planning for Valentine’s Day and St.
Patrick’s Day? Did I miss all of those and go straight to April Fool’s
Day?
On 13-dec-2005, at 0:45, Kyle M. wrote:
We should consider staying with the 0.x.x version numbering for a
variety of reasons, but really it boils down to one main reason: Beta
is the new in thing. I’m typing this message from Gmail(beta) Beta
says that you are on the cutting edge, that you’re “with it.”
With futher consideration, I believe that we should further revise the
system to use negative version numbers. This will futher underscore
that Rails is moving in a new direction, one never seen before in the
history of IT. I hope we can come together as a community and label
the next version of Rails " - 0.0.0.15 "
Actually it would also need it’s own build of Subversion which will
basically remove entries from the changelog (because it is less
software) and going to count the revisions backwards, so that Rails
-1.4 can also sport a shiny -3200 revision number.
When the revisions will cross zero you will be able to say that Rails
has done a complete iteration.
–
Julian ‘Julik’ Tarkhanov
me at julik.nl
Kyle M. wrote:
We should consider staying with the 0.x.x version numbering for a
variety of reasons, but really it boils down to one main reason: Beta
is the new in thing. I’m typing this message from Gmail(beta) Beta
says that you are on the cutting edge, that you’re “with it.”
With futher consideration, I believe that we should further revise the
system to use negative version numbers. This will futher underscore
that Rails is moving in a new direction, one never seen before in the
history of IT. I hope we can come together as a community and label
the next version of Rails " - 0.0.0.15 "
You are too late!
http://www.rubyonrails.org/
regards
Justin