JavaScript 2015?

Andrea Giammarchi andrea.giammarchi at
Thu Jan 22 16:28:39 PST 2015

I've read after sending last email the rationale but I am still not sure
"continuous specs integration" should be related with the year.

I particularly don't like the idea that things could be dropped or rushed
last minute just because the new years eve is coming ... this feel like
those stories with tight deadlines where management could easily fail due
over-expectations on all possible 3rd parts alignment ( you know, like
those 12 different JS engines out there .... + spartans )

I do like the idea of having more frequent rolling releases, but yet I
don't know why year-naming would be the choice.

Anyway, please consider keeping ES6 exactly ES6, we will have time to align
the ESX where X = previous ESX +2009 concept.

to Doctor Alex, at this point I think you should really stick with ES6 or
avoid the ES at all and use JS 2015

Your book though, won't be so interesting in few months, users also pay a
lot of extra and unnecessary attention to a year in a name ... things will
feel outdated before will be even implemented by some vendor.

Weird choice, not my cup of tea for sure.

Best Regards

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 12:17 AM, Brendan Eich <brendan at> wrote:

> Andrea Giammarchi wrote:
>> I really don't understand ...
> I'm pretty sure you do understand -- you just don't like it.
> The annual cycle may fail, but that would be "bad". If it works out, we
> could still continue with ES6, 7, 8, etc.
> I'm leery of revolutionary fanaticism of the kind that led the French
> revolutionaries to invent new month names. Perhaps we're overreaching by
> declaring ES2015 before we've even wrapped up ES6, never mind implemented
> all of it in top browsers! You could be calling b.s. on this, please tell
> me if I'm "warm".
> Anyway, I agree "ES6" is out there. I cited, and of
> course you're right, there are other sites and tutorials. The ES5/6/...
> pattern won't go away over night, no matter what bloody revolutionaries try
> to enact :-|.
> This should keep everyone from charging ahead with renaming right now. We
> need to socialize the annuals idea more, and actually hit the schedule. At
> that point we *will* have ES6 = ES2015, ES7 = (probably) 2016, etc. --
> twice the number of names to keep straight.
> /be
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the es-discuss mailing list