I just noticed that both http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ and
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/ advertise 1.9.1-p376, but
ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 as
well? Which is preferred?
Regards,
Jeremy H.
Jeremy H. wrote:
I just noticed that both http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ and
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/ advertise 1.9.1-p376, but
ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 as
well? Which is preferred?Regards,
Jeremy H.
p376 is the advertised as the stable release, but I’ve been running p378
for some time now and don’t have any problems with it. I can’t seem to
locate a changelog about what changed specifically between those 2.
Dimitri De Frenne
2010/5/31 Dimitri De Frenne [email protected]:
Jeremy H. wrote:
I just noticed that both http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ and
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/ advertise 1.9.1-p376, but
ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 as
well? Which is preferred?
p376 is the advertised as the stable release, but I’ve been running p378
for some time now and don’t have any problems with it. I can’t seem to
locate a changelog about what changed specifically between those 2.
You can search for issues at
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby-191/issues with filter on
status=closed && “ruby -v” contains “ruby 1.9.1p378”. I find 13 bugs
among them some segfaults.
Kind regards
robert
Robert K. wrote:
2010/5/31 Dimitri De Frenne [email protected]:
Jeremy H. wrote:
I just noticed that both http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ and
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/ advertise 1.9.1-p376, but
ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 as
well? �Which is preferred?p376 is the advertised as the stable release, but I’ve been running p378
for some time now and don’t have any problems with it. I can’t seem to
locate a changelog about what changed specifically between those 2.You can search for issues at
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby-191/issues with filter on
status=closed && “ruby -v” contains “ruby 1.9.1p378”. I find 13 bugs
among them some segfaults.Kind regards
robert
Ah, thanks :).
Dimitri De Frenne
On May 31, 2010, at 7:50 AM, Jeremy H. wrote:
I just noticed that both http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ and
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/ advertise 1.9.1-p376, but
ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378 as
well? Which is preferred?
378 is preferred. The page was just out-of-date. I’ve updated it.
James Edward G. II
On 2010-05-31, James Edward G. II [email protected] wrote:
On May 31, 2010, at 7:50 AM, Jeremy H. wrote:
I just noticed that both http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ and
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/downloads/ advertise 1.9.1-p376, but
ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/1.9/ also contains ruby-1.9.1-p378
as well? Which is preferred?378 is preferred. The page was just out-of-date. I’ve updated it.
Thanks for clearing that up James! Mind you, it’s still a little
confusing that the “Other News” section on
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ only mentions -p376 . Maybe an item
about -p378 could be added there?
Regards,
Jeremy H.
On 2010-06-01, James Edward G. II [email protected] wrote:
could be working on Ruby.
No problem with that. I was really asking for a pony there!
In general though, point releases should just contain bug fixes.
Given that, bigger is better is a good rule-of-thumb.
Thanks again James.
Regards,
Jeremy H.
On May 31, 2010, at 12:20 PM, Jeremy H. wrote:
Thanks for clearing that up James! Mind you, it’s still a little
confusing that the “Other News” section on
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/ only mentions -p376 . Maybe an item
about -p378 could be added there?
The core team doesn’t always write about every point release, I assume
because it’s a bit of work that takes away from the time they could be
working on Ruby.
In general though, point releases should just contain bug fixes. Given
that, bigger is better is a good rule-of-thumb.
Hope that helps.
James Edward G. II