Comment by stephenr
11 years ago
To me it just follows on the ridiculousness of the Node community in general. A tool at version 0.10 and everyone screams about how stable it is and can't wait to bet their business on it.
A bunch of people are unhappy and fork the project, and make the initial version 1.0, but make a point of saying (despite not using a related version number/identifier) that it's beta.
Realistically it sounds like both projects should be at v0.9.x.
This seems like a step away from "ridiculous" to me.
Declaring something as 1.0 means that any 1.X releases are going to be backwards-compatible with the 1.0 spec.
This is objectively different than versioning something 0.X, which implies that the baseline spec is not finalized.
Calling something "Beta", however, just means that a feature-complete major version is still being actively developed (i.e. new minor features and bugfixes).
In other words "1.0 Beta" just means "Stable spec, active codebase".
So why is it called "1.0.1" (and now 1.0.1 on the homepage) and not "1.0.0-beta" ?
The 1.0.0 release was called 1.0.0 - there has been a patch release since. Pretty much any software I can think of lists the latest release on the homepage rather than linking to a static version, but you're right it's a little confusing that specifying a version in the querystring doesn't actually appear to link directly to that version.
EDIT: confusing if the intention of the iojs team was to have the querystring actually mean something... they may well not have that intention, in which case meh :)
3 replies →