# Stating my opininon

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/stating-my-opininon/15942>\
**Category:** Community\
**Tags:** releases\
**Created:** [October 5, 2018, 7:00pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/stating-my-opininon/15942 "2018-10-05T19:00:06Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 2

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![jeff.bezanson](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/jeff.bezanson/32/48_2.png) [@jeff.bezanson](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/jeff.bezanson)\
**Post date:** [October 5, 2018, 7:15pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/stating-my-opininon/15942/2 "2018-10-05T19:15:07Z")

</div>

> [@Another possible solution to the global scope debacle](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/another-possible-solution-to-the-global-scope-debacle/15894/94):
>
> Jeff says that releasing 2.0 with just this fix is laughable, but releasing 0.7 along 1.0 with no proper testing period was also laughable (DevOps people I know really laughed when I told them this ☹ ). So if we didn’t care back then, why care now?

I am not hearing this. This particular change was on master and 0.7-alpha for a very long time, and many people used those versions. You’re also making it sound like we somehow didn’t test it. We did test it, and it worked exactly as intended. Ok, so you think the 1.0 release was absurd. Fine. So that makes it ok to make another absurd major release?

The “mistake” actually consisted of a positive change from a software engineering perspective. The behavior now is much more reliable in large source files and projects. Then it turned out that some people really wanted to do lecture examples with certain 3-line loops in the REPL, and that became less convenient to the tune of _adding a single word_ to the code. So stop trying to paint this like some huge screwup requiring reflection and contrition. My patience is running out.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/stating-my-opininon/15942)._