There was an interesting discussion on the dev list not long ago
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/julia-dev/CYhPCQ4rCLY/ByyIW_Ka0ooJ> about
the release schedule of Julia. Although it focused more on timeline and
less on version numbering, it touched on several of the topics discussed in
this thread as well. We do have some âexpectation problemsâ of our own in
the Julia community, for example as Tobi put it in the other thread:
the main issue is in my point that during a dev period feature come in and
people start to use the dev branch for regular development. The Compat
module is in my opinion made the wrong way around. What currently happens
is that unstable features are bypassed into a âreleasedâ package landscape.
Julia is an awesome project, and itâs going to be an awesome product when
itâs âdoneâ. But currently, weâre in the middle of a phase of development
where you cannot expect to accurately predict where weâre going to be in
three or six months, much less predict a date for a 1.0 release (after all,
it was once said that *âweâve been much more on top of the release process
this timeâ
<https://groups.google.com/d/msg/julia-dev/CYhPCQ4rCLY/ByyIW_Ka0ooJ>* about
0.4, but weâre still falling behind schedule on this one tooâŠ). Donât get
me wrong - I think this is totally fine for a project like Julia. We
*should* be experimenting, trying things out and taking the time to make
sure the decisions we make are the right ones.
But maybe we should stop expecting to have a production-quality product to
play around with.
(On the other hand, Julia programmers will probably always have high
expectations, considering Juliaâs origins
<http://julialang.org/blog/2012/02/why-we-created-julia/>âŠ)
// T
On Wednesday, July 29, 2015 at 7:00:38 PM UTC+2, Tony Kelman wrote:
I guess the waters are a little muddied here lately with Rust having
Post by Tony Kelmanrecently put such a big emphasis on stability and reaching 1.0, actively
telling people not to use the language prior to that point, and seemingly
having really high expectations about how long 1.x will last for. They have
a much smaller standard library than we do, but I would think trimming ours
down to the bare minimum would be necessary before calling the language
1.0. Maybe that could just as well be a 2.0 or 3.0 target instead.
Post by Stefan KarpinskiI do believe that other languages have not really followed the semantic
versioning specification (can't blame them really since it didn't exist)
and have introduced backwards incompatible changes in minor versions. If
we're going to follow semver, then we will very likely want to make major
releases more often since we will probably have some backwards incompatible
changes we want to introduce periodically, even if they're not huge.
Actually considering that we've been more strict about version
discipline than absolutely required by semver for 0.x.y, maybe we could
pull a GCC and just start treating major number the way we've been treating
minor. It might not be all that different, except we'd be able to do the
"backporting features" thing and have a very good way of dealing with it.
So I retract my incredulity.
Post by Stefan KarpinskiDoing more frequent major releases than has been traditional for
programming languages strikes me as not a terrible idea, honestly.
Post by Tony KelmanI'm with Kevin, having followed development (too) closely for the last
year and a half I find the prospect of 1.0 any time during 2016 totally
ridiculous and unrelealistic. Unless you fully anticipate releasing 2.0
some time in 2017.
Post by Stefan KarpinskiThat's literally the only part of that post that I would change :-)
But no, I'm not trolling, 1.0 should be out next year. Predicting
down to the month â or even quarter â is hard, but that's what I think
we're looking at. I'll post a 1.0 roadmap issue soon.
Post by Kevin SquireStefan, are you trolling again? ;-P
http://julialang.org/blog/2012/02/why-we-created-julia/
On Tue, Jul 28, 2015 at 12:41 PM, Stefan Karpinski <
Post by Stefan KarpinskiVersion 1.0 will be released around this time next year.
Post by PileasGreetings,
I have been following the development of Julia for sometime now
and I am really thrilled to know that you guys have reached version 0.3.11.
To my understanding sometime in the near future you will release
the new version 0.4.0., a version that it is supposed to bring many
changes.
My question is simple: when is Julia expected to "mature", so that
a "universal" (more or less) documentation (or maybe more thorough books
than those that exist by now) will follow and less bug fixed will be needed?
I wish you the best!
â