Re: Bug#522996: ITP: jruby1.2 -- 100% pure-Java implementation of Ruby
Sebastien Delafond dijo [Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 02:17:09PM -0700]:
> On Apr/07, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > But why a need for two versions at a time ? AFAICS, jruby 1.2 supports
> > both ruby 1.8 *and* 1.9, as jruby 1.1 does, so why would jruby 1.1
> > still be needed ?
>
> As I said in my other mail, for transition reasons;
> backward-compatibility is something many people like to *try* before
> actually taking the leap.
Umh... For our users (yes, those following stable releases), do you
want to provide an not-exactly-bleeding-edge-but-stable and one
quite-old versions? Why? What's the gain?
--
Gunnar Wolf - gwolf@gwolf.org - (+52-55)5623-0154 / 1451-2244
PGP key 1024D/8BB527AF 2001-10-23
Fingerprint: 0C79 D2D1 2C4E 9CE4 5973 F800 D80E F35A 8BB5 27AF
Reply to: