Lucas Nussbaum escreveu isso aí: > So there are three things to decide. > > 1) should we upload that version to unstable, or to experimental? I'm > very much inclined to upload it to unstable, since it seems better than > 1.9.2 in many regards. I think we could have it in unstable, since in theory the compatibility level stays the same. > 2) should we make that version the default for wheezy? We don't need to > decide that yet, but I think that we should seriously consider that now. > (and I'm in favor of doing it). The transition is looking very good > according to http://pkg-ruby-extras.alioth.debian.org/wheezy/ . > > 3) if we make 1.9.3 the default, should we drop 1.8 ? I'm also in favor > of doing that, to reduce the maintenance cost. I agree with making 1.9 the default, since that's what everyone who works with Ruby today expects. On the other hand, I think it's premature to drop 1.8 since it is still heavily used and there is a lot of code out there that does not support 1.9. For example, look at this report from New Relic: http://blog.newrelic.com/2011/09/28/state-of-the-stack-a-ruby-on-rails-benchmarking-report-sept-2011/ I think the sensible thing to do would be to drop 1.8 for Wheezy+1, and to announce this fact on the Wheezy release notes. -- Antonio Terceiro <terceiro@debian.org>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature