Re: [Jython-dev] Jython is active again

[Charles O. N. <cha...@su...>]

Leo User wrote:
> Those probably aren't the best category names.  You
> can be in the inactive category but still be under
> development.  Yes, I know there is a description of
> "inactive" but its not the scenario that comes to my
> mind when I hear "inactive".  I think "nothing
> happening".

That's exactly my thought. I heard "inactive" and immediately said "well 
that's obviously wrong". I wouldn't consider Ruby 1.9/2.0 to be anywhere 
near "inactive" either, but they haven't had a public non-development 
release...ever. And is Perl6/Parrot "inactive"? Ok, so that's arguable.

-- 
Charles Oliver Nutter, JRuby Core Developer
Blogging on Ruby and Java @ headius.blogspot.com
Help spec out Ruby today! @ www.headius.com/rubyspec
he...@he... -- cha...@su...