I think we can all agree that the world would be a better place if every project strictly followed semantic versioning and if people interpreted version numbers accordingly. It would be a triumph of science over mysticism. But we know that people don't do this and that is why we are having this conversation. For some languages, taking into account what people are used to doing is an important concern (Java, C++). But I don't think that is Clojure's philosophy. Come on people, it's a Lisp. It would have never been a Lisp if Rich cared what the gut reaction of the masses would be. The core philosophy of Clojure is to do it right (even if that is not popular) and then convince people as to why this is the right way to do things. Clojure isn't a Trojan horse, it's a beacon of hope. Let's continue that tradition and not do something based on gut reactions. Let's do it right and call it the backward incompatible version 2.0 that it is. Maybe it will inspire other projects to do the same.
Brenton On Feb 22, 6:27 pm, Christopher Redinger <ch...@thinkrelevance.com> wrote: > As you can see on the Release.Next Planning page [1], there is an open > question about whether or not the next version of Clojure should be 1.3 or > 2.0. The issue at hand is that we are introducing backwards incompatible API > changes. Not looking to start a debate at this point, but just taking a > temperature reading from the community. If you care about what the next > version number of Clojure is - could you please cast a vote in the poll here: > > https://spreadsheets.google.com/a/thinkrelevance.com/viewform?hl=en&f... > > Thanks! > > [1]http://dev.clojure.org/display/design/Release.Next+Planning > > -- > Christopher Redingerhttp://clojure.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
