* Trevor Parscal tparscal@wikimedia.org [Tue, 6 Dec 2011 17:21:43 -0800]:
The hype of "2.0" aside, is there a guideline for what should
constitute
a major version number change?
It looks like we are doing something like: Major.Minor.Release
1.18 = Major: 1, Minor: 18, (alpha|beta|etc.)
I'm just curious what people think would constitue a major version. We've certainly had major rewrites of systems in the past that didn't seem
to
justify a version bump. Is there anything wrong with having version 1.249? Is there a practical reason for bumping the version at some point
(like
when the minor version hits tripple digits)?
Also, a rewrite of MediaWiki should for sure be done in Node.js :)
- Trevor
Is Javascript really that good? Some people dislike prototypical inheritance, it seems that jQuery prefers to use wrappers instead (that's a kind of suboptimal architecture). Also, Google had some complains about Javascript flaws (for example primitive types don't allow high performance available in Java / C#), suggesting to replace it with something else.. Although having common clientside / serverside codebase is nice thing, for sure. And there's nothing more widespread than Javascript at client side. Also, it's object side is strong (something like Lisp with C-syntax), however it does not have generics, named parameters etc.. Dmitriy