It seems a shame that the 1.0 release of IronRuby isn''t going to be able to run Rails 3, since they seem to be landing at around the same time. I guess the differences between MRI 1.8.6 and 1.8.7 are pretty major, though, so not much can be done about it at this stage? Any idea how long after the 1.0 RTM we might start seeing 1.8.7 (or 1.9.x?) compatibility? Cheers, Mark -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100211/84083a51/attachment.html>
+1 ! Any idea how long after the 1.0 RTM we might start seeing 1.8.7 (or 1.9.x?)> compatibility? >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100212/c93f5799/attachment.html>
Along these lines: Are you interested in the 1.8.7 features, or just things like Rails compat (which 1.9.x compat would give) JD From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Orion Edwards Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 11:52 AM To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility +1 ! Any idea how long after the 1.0 RTM we might start seeing 1.8.7 (or 1.9.x?) compatibility? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100211/8664db01/attachment.html>
For me it is just Rails 3.0 compat :) On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Jim Deville <jdeville at microsoft.com> wrote:> Along these lines: > > > > Are you interested in the 1.8.7 features, or just things like Rails compat > (which 1.9.x compat would give) > > > > JD > > > > From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org > [mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Orion Edwards > Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 11:52 AM > To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility > > > > +1 ! > > Any idea how long after the 1.0 RTM we might start seeing 1.8.7 (or 1.9.x?) > compatibility? > > _______________________________________________ > Ironruby-core mailing list > Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core > >
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 22:20, Jim Deville <jdeville at microsoft.com> wrote:> Are you interested in the 1.8.7 features, or just things like Rails compat > (which 1.9.x compat would give)In all honesty (and regardless of Rails 3.0 compat) I think that working on 1.8.7 features would be a waste of time and that the target for a post-1.0 major release of IronRuby should be set to 1.9. But anyway, this is coming from one of the few ruby devs that doesn''t care a bit about Rails ;-) -- Daniele Alessandri http://www.clorophilla.net/ http://twitter.com/JoL1hAHN
Personally I''d like the 1.8.7 library changes (The Enumerable module has a bunch more useful stuff in 1.8.7) but beyond that I can''t actually remember what the changes were, so I don''t really miss them :-) If IronRuby has 1.9.x compat, then the library changes would get pulled in for that, so the 1.8.7 changes are probably not worth worrying about. On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Jim Deville <jdeville at microsoft.com>wrote:> Along these lines: > > > > Are you interested in the 1.8.7 features, or just things like Rails compat > (which 1.9.x compat would give) > > > > JD > > > > *From:* ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto: > ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] *On Behalf Of *Orion Edwards > *Sent:* Thursday, February 11, 2010 11:52 AM > *To:* ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > *Subject:* Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility > > > > +1 ! > > Any idea how long after the 1.0 RTM we might start seeing 1.8.7 (or 1.9.x?) > compatibility? > > > _______________________________________________ > Ironruby-core mailing list > Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100212/a00f1126/attachment.html>
I believe 1.9 includes most of the changes that are in 1.8.7 and 1.8.8. JD From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Orion Edwards Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 5:17 PM To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility Personally I''d like the 1.8.7 library changes (The Enumerable module has a bunch more useful stuff in 1.8.7) but beyond that I can''t actually remember what the changes were, so I don''t really miss them :-) If IronRuby has 1.9.x compat, then the library changes would get pulled in for that, so the 1.8.7 changes are probably not worth worrying about. On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Jim Deville <jdeville at microsoft.com<mailto:jdeville at microsoft.com>> wrote: Along these lines: Are you interested in the 1.8.7 features, or just things like Rails compat (which 1.9.x compat would give) JD From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org> [mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org>] On Behalf Of Orion Edwards Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 11:52 AM To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core at rubyforge.org> Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility +1 ! Any idea how long after the 1.0 RTM we might start seeing 1.8.7 (or 1.9.x?) compatibility? _______________________________________________ Ironruby-core mailing list Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org<mailto:Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100212/555a47bb/attachment-0001.html>
+1 for 1.9 1.8.7 and 1.8.8 are backport releases with stuff they put in Ruby 1.9 AFAIK --- Met vriendelijke groeten - Best regards - Salutations Ivan Porto Carrero Blog: http://flanders.co.nz Twitter: http://twitter.com/casualjim Author of IronRuby in Action (http://manning.com/carrero) On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 6:00 AM, Jim Deville <jdeville at microsoft.com> wrote:> I believe 1.9 includes most of the changes that are in 1.8.7 and 1.8.8. > > > > JD > > > > *From:* ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto: > ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] *On Behalf Of *Orion Edwards > *Sent:* Thursday, February 11, 2010 5:17 PM > > *To:* ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > *Subject:* Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility > > > > Personally I''d like the 1.8.7 library changes (The Enumerable module has a > bunch more useful stuff in 1.8.7) but beyond that I can''t actually remember > what the changes were, so I don''t really miss them :-) > > > > If IronRuby has 1.9.x compat, then the library changes would get pulled in > for that, so the 1.8.7 changes are probably not worth worrying about. > > > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Jim Deville <jdeville at microsoft.com> > wrote: > > Along these lines: > > > > Are you interested in the 1.8.7 features, or just things like Rails compat > (which 1.9.x compat would give) > > > > JD > > > > *From:* ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto: > ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] *On Behalf Of *Orion Edwards > *Sent:* Thursday, February 11, 2010 11:52 AM > *To:* ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > *Subject:* Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility > > > > +1 ! > > Any idea how long after the 1.0 RTM we might start seeing 1.8.7 (or 1.9.x?) > compatibility? > > > _______________________________________________ > Ironruby-core mailing list > Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ironruby-core mailing list > Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100212/8de1930f/attachment.html>
+1 for 1.9
On 2/11/2010 10:53 PM, Ivan Porto Carrero wrote:
+1 for 1.9
1.8.7 and 1.8.8 are backport releases with stuff they put in
Ruby 1.9 AFAIK
---
Met vriendelijke groeten - Best regards - Salutations
Ivan Porto Carrero
Blog: http://flanders.co.nz
Twitter: http://twitter.com/casualjim
Author of IronRuby in Action (http://manning.com/carrero)
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 6:00 AM, Jim Deville
<jdeville-0li6OtcxBFHby3iVrkZq2A@public.gmane.org>
wrote:
I believe 1.9
includes most of the changes that are in 1.8.7 and 1.8.8.
JD
From: ironruby-core-bounces-GrnCvJ7WPxnNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org
[mailto:ironruby-core-bounces-GrnCvJ7WPxnNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org]
On Behalf Of Orion Edwards
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 5:17 PM
To: ironruby-core-GrnCvJ7WPxnNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility
Personally I''d like the 1.8.7 library changes
(The Enumerable module has a bunch more useful stuff in 1.8.7) but
beyond that I can''t actually remember what the changes were, so I
don''t
really miss them :-)
If IronRuby has 1.9.x compat, then the library
changes would get pulled in for that, so the 1.8.7 changes are probably
not worth worrying about.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Jim Deville
<jdeville-0li6OtcxBFHby3iVrkZq2A@public.gmane.org> wrote:
Along these lines:
Are you interested
in the 1.8.7 features, or just things like Rails compat (which 1.9.x
compat would give)
JD
From: ironruby-core-bounces-GrnCvJ7WPxnNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org
[mailto:ironruby-core-bounces-GrnCvJ7WPxnNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org]
On Behalf Of Orion Edwards
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 11:52 AM
To: ironruby-core-GrnCvJ7WPxnNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility
+1 !
Any idea how long after the 1.0 RTM we might
start seeing 1.8.7 (or 1.9.x?) compatibility?
_______________________________________________
Ironruby-core mailing list
Ironruby-core-GrnCvJ7WPxnNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
_______________________________________________
Ironruby-core mailing list
Ironruby-core-GrnCvJ7WPxnNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
_______________________________________________
Ironruby-core mailing list
Ironruby-core-GrnCvJ7WPxnNLxjTenLetw@public.gmane.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
Mainly Rails 3.0 compatibility. I''d far rather 1.9.x than 1.8.7, but not at the expense of Rails compatibility taking longer. Mark On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Jim Deville <jdeville at microsoft.com> wrote:> Along these lines: > > > > Are you interested in the 1.8.7 features, or just things like Rails compat > (which 1.9.x compat would give) > > > > JD > > > > *From:* ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto: > ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] *On Behalf Of *Orion Edwards > *Sent:* Thursday, February 11, 2010 11:52 AM > > *To:* ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > *Subject:* Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility > > > > +1 ! > > Any idea how long after the 1.0 RTM we might start seeing 1.8.7 (or 1.9.x?) > compatibility? > > > _______________________________________________ > Ironruby-core mailing list > Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100213/7aacfd19/attachment.html>
+1 for 1.9 Once you consider that by the time IronRuby claims 1.8.7 compat Ruby will likely have a 1.8.9, I think going for 1.9 just makes the most sense. Everything else is moving or has moved to 1.9, so I''d rather see that happen. Ryan Riley Email: ryan.riley at panesofglass.org LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley Blog: http://wizardsofsmart.net/ Twitter: @panesofglass Website: http://panesofglass.org/ On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 3:21 AM, Mark Rendle <mark at markrendle.net> wrote:> Mainly Rails 3.0 compatibility. I''d far rather 1.9.x than 1.8.7, but not at > the expense of Rails compatibility taking longer. > > Mark > > On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 9:20 PM, Jim Deville <jdeville at microsoft.com>wrote: > >> Along these lines: >> >> >> >> Are you interested in the 1.8.7 features, or just things like Rails compat >> (which 1.9.x compat would give) >> >> >> >> JD >> >> >> >> *From:* ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto: >> ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] *On Behalf Of *Orion Edwards >> *Sent:* Thursday, February 11, 2010 11:52 AM >> >> *To:* ironruby-core at rubyforge.org >> *Subject:* Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility >> >> >> >> +1 ! >> >> Any idea how long after the 1.0 RTM we might start seeing 1.8.7 (or >> 1.9.x?) compatibility? >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Ironruby-core mailing list >> Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org >> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Ironruby-core mailing list > Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100214/986b2c29/attachment.html>
Here''s the current compatibility plan, let me know if this concerns anyone:> IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible > ==================================================> IronRuby has created a 1.0-servicing branch (not on GitHub yet, > but shortly); all ruby-1.8.6 compatible releases will come out > of that branch, starting with the just-released 1.0-rc2, followed > by 1.0, and any future 1.0.x releases. We will also removing any > 1.9 features from the 1.0-servicing branch (-19 and -20 flags), > so IronRuby 1.0 will only be 1.8.6 compatible. > > > IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatible > ==============================================> Active development will still happens in the master branch, which > will be only focused on ruby-1.9 support. This means the master > branch will lose ruby-1.8.6 compatibility as breaking changes > between ruby-1.8.6 and ruby-1.9 are implemented. However, we''ll > probably look at implementing 1.8.7 features that are also in 1.9, > so we might get ruby-1.8.7 compatibility as a byproduct of that, > but it''s not something we''ll be testing.Most ruby implementations are also moving away from supporting 1.8 and 1.9 in the same codebase as well. Even more extreme, MacRuby is completely skipping 1.8 compatibility, but that technically makes sense as they are a fork of the 1.9 codebase. ~Jimmy
Here''s the current compatibility plan, let me know if this concerns anyone:> IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible > ==================================================> IronRuby has created a 1.0-servicing branch (not on GitHub yet, but > shortly); all ruby-1.8.6 compatible releases will come out of that > branch, starting with the just-released 1.0-rc2, followed by 1.0, and > any future 1.0.x releases. We will also removing any > 1.9 features from the 1.0-servicing branch (-19 and -20 flags), so > IronRuby 1.0 will only be 1.8.6 compatible. > > > IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatible > ==============================================> Active development will still happens in the master branch, which will > be only focused on ruby-1.9 support. This means the master branch will > lose ruby-1.8.6 compatibility as breaking changes between ruby-1.8.6 > and ruby-1.9 are implemented. However, we''ll probably look at > implementing 1.8.7 features that are also in 1.9, so we might get > ruby-1.8.7 compatibility as a byproduct of that, but it''s not > something we''ll be testing.Most ruby implementations are also moving away from supporting 1.8 and 1.9 in the same codebase as well. Even more extreme, MacRuby is completely skipping 1.8 compatibility, but that technically makes sense as they are a fork of the 1.9 codebase. ~Jimmy
How much effort is it to get 1.8.7 compatible? How much to get 1.9 compatible? What is driving the push to release 1.0? My fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the ability to run it will do little for IronRuby''s image in the wider Ruby community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about weather it can run Rails or not). -- Will Green http://hotgazpacho.org/ On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Jimmy Schementi < Jimmy.Schementi at microsoft.com> wrote:> Here''s the current compatibility plan, let me know if this concerns anyone: > > > > IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible > > ==================================================> > IronRuby has created a 1.0-servicing branch (not on GitHub yet, > > but shortly); all ruby-1.8.6 compatible releases will come out > > of that branch, starting with the just-released 1.0-rc2, followed > > by 1.0, and any future 1.0.x releases. We will also removing any > > 1.9 features from the 1.0-servicing branch (-19 and -20 flags), > > so IronRuby 1.0 will only be 1.8.6 compatible. > > > > > > IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatible > > ==============================================> > Active development will still happens in the master branch, which > > will be only focused on ruby-1.9 support. This means the master > > branch will lose ruby-1.8.6 compatibility as breaking changes > > between ruby-1.8.6 and ruby-1.9 are implemented. However, we''ll > > probably look at implementing 1.8.7 features that are also in 1.9, > > so we might get ruby-1.8.7 compatibility as a byproduct of that, > > but it''s not something we''ll be testing. > > > Most ruby implementations are also moving away from supporting 1.8 > and 1.9 in the same codebase as well. Even more extreme, MacRuby is > completely skipping 1.8 compatibility, but that technically makes sense > as they are a fork of the 1.9 codebase. > > ~Jimmy > _______________________________________________ > Ironruby-core mailing list > Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100215/5e0377f5/attachment-0001.html>
> IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible > IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatible> My fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the > ability to run it will do little for IronRuby''s image in the wider Ruby > community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about weather it > can run Rails or not). >+1. While it seems logical to go down the path jimmy mentioned, It looks like what will happen is that rails3 won''t run on IronRuby at all until the 1.x releases build up 1.9 compat to a decent enough point and stabilize. Is 1.9 compat a big deal? It seems like it would be a ton of work to implement 1.9 compatibility in a stable way - thereby leaving IronRuby unable to run rails 3 for a long long time... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100216/3e6a8344/attachment.html>
DISCLAIMER: We haven''t discussed this yet, I''m just tossing it out to get thoughts. One option may be to put Rails 3 compat as the focus for 1.1, so that we do 1.0 in a few months on our current timeline, then put the focus into implementing the needed things for Rails 3. After that we can continue onto 1.9 support. Thoughts? JD From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Orion Edwards Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 1:51 PM To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility> IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible > IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatibleMy fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the ability to run it will do little for IronRuby''s image in the wider Ruby community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about weather it can run Rails or not). +1. While it seems logical to go down the path jimmy mentioned, It looks like what will happen is that rails3 won''t run on IronRuby at all until the 1.x releases build up 1.9 compat to a decent enough point and stabilize. Is 1.9 compat a big deal? It seems like it would be a ton of work to implement 1.9 compatibility in a stable way - thereby leaving IronRuby unable to run rails 3 for a long long time... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100215/d825efed/attachment.html>
Good point, but slight overreaction =) Running Rails 3 and being 1.8.7 compatible can be completely different goals, as Rails 3 doesn''t use all of the 1.8.7 features. =) We can implement the features needed for Rails 3 for the releases after 1.0, so we may turn out to be compatible-enough with 1.8.7 for Rails 3. But, since we''re not going to run tests against both 1.8.7 and 1.9, we won''t be compatible enough to actually say "ruby-1.8.7 compatible". Plus, we''d like to start ripping out ruby-1.8 features from the 1.x releases, so that might be an impossible statement. Since 1.9 is the future of Ruby, we''re jumping directly to supporting it, as that will position IronRuby for great compatibility in the future, rather than trying to optimize for the current state of the ruby-world. If Rails 3 on IronRuby 1.1 or 1.2 is very important to people, than it''ll find a way of happening. But 1.8.x support is a dead-end, and not worth the IronRuby core team''s or contributor''s time. Plus, Matz ordered me to stop caring about 1.8 support, so I can''t say no to that =P Are there other reasons why it''s important for IronRuby to be ruby-1.8.7 compatible? If not, I''d prefer to just prioritize any changes needed for "Rails 3 support", rather than 1.8.7 support. ~Jimmy From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Orion Edwards Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 1:51 PM To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility> IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible > IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatibleMy fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the ability to run it will do little for IronRuby''s image in the wider Ruby community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about weather it can run Rails or not). +1. While it seems logical to go down the path jimmy mentioned, It looks like what will happen is that rails3 won''t run on IronRuby at all until the 1.x releases build up 1.9 compat to a decent enough point and stabilize. Is 1.9 compat a big deal? It seems like it would be a ton of work to implement 1.9 compatibility in a stable way - thereby leaving IronRuby unable to run rails 3 for a long long time... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100215/d177aa86/attachment.html>
1) What''s the story on the other implementations for Rails 3? In other words, will JRuby, Rubinius, et. al. run Rails 3 out of the gate? If so, are they doing it on a 1.9 compat version or 1.8.7? If they are pursuing the former, no one will be able to fault IronRuby for not supporting Rails. If the latter, well, that''s your decision. :) 2) I''m not hard up for running Rails 3 on IronRuby. People are running Rails apps on *nix boxes now. A few more months isn''t going to hurt them. Also, while deploying Rails more easily on Windows is a selling point for IronRuby, I think most will likely be on Rails 2.3.5 or previous for some time to come until they get up to speed with Rails 3. We have time. 3) I really don''t see Rails, in general, as a primary reason for using IronRuby. There are a number of other libraries (some running on 1.9) that would be more likely candidates for driving IronRuby adoption. Stopping the presses just to get Rails 3 running when that doesn''t drive 1.9 forward seems a bit short-sighted. In other words, I like the current plan. :) Ryan Riley Email: ryan.riley at panesofglass.org LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley Blog: http://wizardsofsmart.net/ Twitter: @panesofglass Website: http://panesofglass.org/ On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Jim Deville <jdeville at microsoft.com> wrote:> DISCLAIMER: We haven?t discussed this yet, I?m just tossing it out to get > thoughts. > > > > One option may be to put Rails 3 compat as the focus for 1.1, so that we > do 1.0 in a few months on our current timeline, then put the focus into > implementing the needed things for Rails 3. After that we can continue onto > 1.9 support. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > JD > > > > *From:* ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto: > ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] *On Behalf Of *Orion Edwards > *Sent:* Monday, February 15, 2010 1:51 PM > > *To:* ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > *Subject:* Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility > > > > > IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible > > > IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatible > > > > My fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the > ability to run it will do little for IronRuby''s image in the wider Ruby > community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about weather it > can run Rails or not). > > > > +1. > > > > While it seems logical to go down the path jimmy mentioned, It looks like > what will happen is that rails3 won''t run on IronRuby at all until the 1.x > releases build up 1.9 compat to a decent enough point and stabilize. > > > > Is 1.9 compat a big deal? It seems like it would be a ton of work > to implement 1.9 compatibility in a stable way - thereby leaving IronRuby > unable to run rails 3 for a long long time... > > _______________________________________________ > Ironruby-core mailing list > Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100215/efc24380/attachment-0001.html>
JRuby, Rubinius and MacRuby will support Rails 3, but all three of them are either working on a version to support 1.9 (Jruby), or only targeting 1.9 (the other 2). We?ve said a few times in the halls that if we had noticed the timing a year ago, 1.9 would probably have been a better 1.0 target, but at this point, changing directions makes no sense. We can focus on Rails 3 among other priorities after 1.0. To ship is to choose ? JD From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Riley Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 2:30 PM To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility 1) What''s the story on the other implementations for Rails 3? In other words, will JRuby, Rubinius, et. al. run Rails 3 out of the gate? If so, are they doing it on a 1.9 compat version or 1.8.7? If they are pursuing the former, no one will be able to fault IronRuby for not supporting Rails. If the latter, well, that''s your decision. :) 2) I''m not hard up for running Rails 3 on IronRuby. People are running Rails apps on *nix boxes now. A few more months isn''t going to hurt them. Also, while deploying Rails more easily on Windows is a selling point for IronRuby, I think most will likely be on Rails 2.3.5 or previous for some time to come until they get up to speed with Rails 3. We have time. 3) I really don''t see Rails, in general, as a primary reason for using IronRuby. There are a number of other libraries (some running on 1.9) that would be more likely candidates for driving IronRuby adoption. Stopping the presses just to get Rails 3 running when that doesn''t drive 1.9 forward seems a bit short-sighted. In other words, I like the current plan. :) Ryan Riley Email: ryan.riley at panesofglass.org<mailto:ryan.riley at panesofglass.org> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley Blog: http://wizardsofsmart.net/ Twitter: @panesofglass Website: http://panesofglass.org/ On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Jim Deville <jdeville at microsoft.com<mailto:jdeville at microsoft.com>> wrote: DISCLAIMER: We haven?t discussed this yet, I?m just tossing it out to get thoughts. One option may be to put Rails 3 compat as the focus for 1.1, so that we do 1.0 in a few months on our current timeline, then put the focus into implementing the needed things for Rails 3. After that we can continue onto 1.9 support. Thoughts? JD From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org> [mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org>] On Behalf Of Orion Edwards Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 1:51 PM To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core at rubyforge.org> Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility> IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible > IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatibleMy fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the ability to run it will do little for IronRuby''s image in the wider Ruby community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about weather it can run Rails or not). +1. While it seems logical to go down the path jimmy mentioned, It looks like what will happen is that rails3 won''t run on IronRuby at all until the 1.x releases build up 1.9 compat to a decent enough point and stabilize. Is 1.9 compat a big deal? It seems like it would be a ton of work to implement 1.9 compatibility in a stable way - thereby leaving IronRuby unable to run rails 3 for a long long time... _______________________________________________ Ironruby-core mailing list Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org<mailto:Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100215/efced048/attachment.html>
Overreact? I *never* do that ;-) If you guys are close to shipping 1.0, then I don''t have a problem with a newer patch level release, like 1.0.1 or 1.0.2, providing just enough 1.8.7 compat to support Rails 3. On the other hand, if you think that 1.9 support is attainable this year, I''d rather see the team focus on that. -- Will Green http://hotgazpacho.org/ On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Jimmy Schementi < Jimmy.Schementi at microsoft.com> wrote:> Good point, but slight overreaction =) > > > > Running Rails 3 and being 1.8.7 compatible can be completely different > goals, as Rails 3 doesn?t use *all* of the 1.8.7 features. =) We can > implement the features needed for Rails 3 for the releases after 1.0, so we > may turn out to be compatible-enough with 1.8.7 for Rails 3. But, since > we?re not going to run tests against both 1.8.7 and 1.9, we won?t be > compatible enough to actually say ?ruby-1.8.7 compatible?. Plus, we?d like > to start ripping out ruby-1.8 features from the 1.x releases, so that might > be an impossible statement. > > > > Since 1.9 is the future of Ruby, we?re jumping directly to supporting it, > as that will position IronRuby for great compatibility in the future, rather > than trying to optimize for the current state of the ruby-world. If Rails 3 > on IronRuby 1.1 or 1.2 is very important to people, than it?ll find a way of > happening. But 1.8.x support is a dead-end, and not worth the IronRuby core > team?s or contributor?s time. Plus, Matz ordered me to stop caring about 1.8 > support, so I can?t say no to that =P > > > > Are there other reasons why it?s important for IronRuby to be ruby-1.8.7 > compatible? If not, I?d prefer to just prioritize any changes needed for > ?Rails 3 support?, rather than 1.8.7 support. > > > > ~Jimmy > > > > *From:* ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto: > ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] *On Behalf Of *Orion Edwards > > *Sent:* Monday, February 15, 2010 1:51 PM > *To:* ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > *Subject:* Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility > > > > > IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible > > > IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatible > > > > My fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the > ability to run it will do little for IronRuby''s image in the wider Ruby > community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about weather it > can run Rails or not). > > > > +1. > > > > While it seems logical to go down the path jimmy mentioned, It looks like > what will happen is that rails3 won''t run on IronRuby at all until the 1.x > releases build up 1.9 compat to a decent enough point and stabilize. > > > > Is 1.9 compat a big deal? It seems like it would be a ton of work > to implement 1.9 compatibility in a stable way - thereby leaving IronRuby > unable to run rails 3 for a long long time... > > _______________________________________________ > Ironruby-core mailing list > Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100215/2d0d4762/attachment-0001.html>
I honestly don?t think that shipping a 1.0 will delay any future release by much. I also don?t think that a Rails 3 release would hurt the progress towards 1.9. Unless something major changes, I believe all of the 1.8.7 features we are currently lacking for Rails 3 are also 1.9 features. JD From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Will Green Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 3:27 PM To: ironruby-core Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility Overreact? I *never* do that ;-) If you guys are close to shipping 1.0, then I don''t have a problem with a newer patch level release, like 1.0.1 or 1.0.2, providing just enough 1.8.7 compat to support Rails 3. On the other hand, if you think that 1.9 support is attainable this year, I''d rather see the team focus on that. -- Will Green http://hotgazpacho.org/ On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Jimmy Schementi <Jimmy.Schementi at microsoft.com<mailto:Jimmy.Schementi at microsoft.com>> wrote: Good point, but slight overreaction =) Running Rails 3 and being 1.8.7 compatible can be completely different goals, as Rails 3 doesn?t use all of the 1.8.7 features. =) We can implement the features needed for Rails 3 for the releases after 1.0, so we may turn out to be compatible-enough with 1.8.7 for Rails 3. But, since we?re not going to run tests against both 1.8.7 and 1.9, we won?t be compatible enough to actually say ?ruby-1.8.7 compatible?. Plus, we?d like to start ripping out ruby-1.8 features from the 1.x releases, so that might be an impossible statement. Since 1.9 is the future of Ruby, we?re jumping directly to supporting it, as that will position IronRuby for great compatibility in the future, rather than trying to optimize for the current state of the ruby-world. If Rails 3 on IronRuby 1.1 or 1.2 is very important to people, than it?ll find a way of happening. But 1.8.x support is a dead-end, and not worth the IronRuby core team?s or contributor?s time. Plus, Matz ordered me to stop caring about 1.8 support, so I can?t say no to that =P Are there other reasons why it?s important for IronRuby to be ruby-1.8.7 compatible? If not, I?d prefer to just prioritize any changes needed for ?Rails 3 support?, rather than 1.8.7 support. ~Jimmy From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org> [mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org>] On Behalf Of Orion Edwards Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 1:51 PM To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core at rubyforge.org> Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility> IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible > IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatibleMy fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the ability to run it will do little for IronRuby''s image in the wider Ruby community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about weather it can run Rails or not). +1. While it seems logical to go down the path jimmy mentioned, It looks like what will happen is that rails3 won''t run on IronRuby at all until the 1.x releases build up 1.9 compat to a decent enough point and stabilize. Is 1.9 compat a big deal? It seems like it would be a ton of work to implement 1.9 compatibility in a stable way - thereby leaving IronRuby unable to run rails 3 for a long long time... _______________________________________________ Ironruby-core mailing list Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org<mailto:Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100215/3e24d266/attachment.html>
k I''m all for waiting with rails 3.0 or at least not making it the highest priority. The thing is that most people looking at ironruby are actually .NET people IMO. Now these guys have just gone through what is needed to learn 2.3.5. Seen as most enterprise type devs lean towards the mort persona I''d say they aren''t terribly worried yet about using Rails 3.0 they want to continue 2.3.5 until most of the plugins have caught up. Looking at how fast the community does this stuff I''d say we have well over 6 months to get 1.9 compat going. my 2c :) --- Met vriendelijke groeten - Best regards - Salutations Ivan Porto Carrero Blog: http://flanders.co.nz Twitter: http://twitter.com/casualjim Author of IronRuby in Action (http://manning.com/carrero) On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 12:30 AM, Jim Deville <jdeville at microsoft.com>wrote:> I honestly don?t think that shipping a 1.0 will delay any future release by > much. I also don?t think that a Rails 3 release would hurt the progress > towards 1.9. Unless something major changes, I believe all of the 1.8.7 > features we are currently lacking for Rails 3 are also 1.9 features. > > > > JD > > > > *From:* ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto: > ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] *On Behalf Of *Will Green > *Sent:* Monday, February 15, 2010 3:27 PM > *To:* ironruby-core > > *Subject:* Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility > > > > Overreact? I *never* do that ;-) > > > > If you guys are close to shipping 1.0, then I don''t have a problem with a > newer patch level release, like 1.0.1 or 1.0.2, providing just enough 1.8.7 > compat to support Rails 3. On the other hand, if you think that 1.9 support > is attainable this year, I''d rather see the team focus on that. > > > -- > Will Green > http://hotgazpacho.org/ > > On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Jimmy Schementi < > Jimmy.Schementi at microsoft.com> wrote: > > Good point, but slight overreaction =) > > > > Running Rails 3 and being 1.8.7 compatible can be completely different > goals, as Rails 3 doesn?t use *all* of the 1.8.7 features. =) We can > implement the features needed for Rails 3 for the releases after 1.0, so we > may turn out to be compatible-enough with 1.8.7 for Rails 3. But, since > we?re not going to run tests against both 1.8.7 and 1.9, we won?t be > compatible enough to actually say ?ruby-1.8.7 compatible?. Plus, we?d like > to start ripping out ruby-1.8 features from the 1.x releases, so that might > be an impossible statement. > > > > Since 1.9 is the future of Ruby, we?re jumping directly to supporting it, > as that will position IronRuby for great compatibility in the future, rather > than trying to optimize for the current state of the ruby-world. If Rails 3 > on IronRuby 1.1 or 1.2 is very important to people, than it?ll find a way of > happening. But 1.8.x support is a dead-end, and not worth the IronRuby core > team?s or contributor?s time. Plus, Matz ordered me to stop caring about 1.8 > support, so I can?t say no to that =P > > > > Are there other reasons why it?s important for IronRuby to be ruby-1.8.7 > compatible? If not, I?d prefer to just prioritize any changes needed for > ?Rails 3 support?, rather than 1.8.7 support. > > > > ~Jimmy > > > > *From:* ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto: > ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] *On Behalf Of *Orion Edwards > > > *Sent:* Monday, February 15, 2010 1:51 PM > > *To:* ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > *Subject:* Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility > > > > > IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible > > > IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatible > > > > My fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the > ability to run it will do little for IronRuby''s image in the wider Ruby > community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about weather it > can run Rails or not). > > > > +1. > > > > While it seems logical to go down the path jimmy mentioned, It looks like > what will happen is that rails3 won''t run on IronRuby at all until the 1.x > releases build up 1.9 compat to a decent enough point and stabilize. > > > > Is 1.9 compat a big deal? It seems like it would be a ton of work > to implement 1.9 compatibility in a stable way - thereby leaving IronRuby > unable to run rails 3 for a long long time... > > > _______________________________________________ > Ironruby-core mailing list > Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core > > > > _______________________________________________ > Ironruby-core mailing list > Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100216/9f223e5c/attachment.html>
MRI 1.9.1 is my Linux Ruby of choice, so I''m definitely in favour of 1.9 being the focus for IronRuby, and as soon as I can clone a 1.x branch I''ll be all over it, with Rails 3 testing as a focus. (Eventual aim: to prove IronRuby & Rails 3 as a cool Windows Azure solution). Mark On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 10:22 PM, Jimmy Schementi < Jimmy.Schementi at microsoft.com> wrote:> Good point, but slight overreaction =) > > > > Running Rails 3 and being 1.8.7 compatible can be completely different > goals, as Rails 3 doesn?t use *all* of the 1.8.7 features. =) We can > implement the features needed for Rails 3 for the releases after 1.0, so we > may turn out to be compatible-enough with 1.8.7 for Rails 3. But, since > we?re not going to run tests against both 1.8.7 and 1.9, we won?t be > compatible enough to actually say ?ruby-1.8.7 compatible?. Plus, we?d like > to start ripping out ruby-1.8 features from the 1.x releases, so that might > be an impossible statement. > > > > Since 1.9 is the future of Ruby, we?re jumping directly to supporting it, > as that will position IronRuby for great compatibility in the future, rather > than trying to optimize for the current state of the ruby-world. If Rails 3 > on IronRuby 1.1 or 1.2 is very important to people, than it?ll find a way of > happening. But 1.8.x support is a dead-end, and not worth the IronRuby core > team?s or contributor?s time. Plus, Matz ordered me to stop caring about 1.8 > support, so I can?t say no to that =P > > > > Are there other reasons why it?s important for IronRuby to be ruby-1.8.7 > compatible? If not, I?d prefer to just prioritize any changes needed for > ?Rails 3 support?, rather than 1.8.7 support. > > > > ~Jimmy > > > > *From:* ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto: > ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] *On Behalf Of *Orion Edwards > > *Sent:* Monday, February 15, 2010 1:51 PM > *To:* ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > *Subject:* Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility > > > > > IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible > > > IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatible > > > > My fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the > ability to run it will do little for IronRuby''s image in the wider Ruby > community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about weather it > can run Rails or not). > > > > +1. > > > > While it seems logical to go down the path jimmy mentioned, It looks like > what will happen is that rails3 won''t run on IronRuby at all until the 1.x > releases build up 1.9 compat to a decent enough point and stabilize. > > > > Is 1.9 compat a big deal? It seems like it would be a ton of work > to implement 1.9 compatibility in a stable way - thereby leaving IronRuby > unable to run rails 3 for a long long time... > > _______________________________________________ > Ironruby-core mailing list > Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100216/b71f869b/attachment.html>
Thanks for all the feedback on what you guys are interested in. I would like to request folks to start playing with IronRuby and Rails 2.3.5 today. Mark, trying IronRuby + Rails on Azure sounds like a great project. It would be great if you could look at using Rails 2.3.5 for now. Having such a demo for IronRuby V1 RTM will be a great showcasing of the exiting functionality. I understand that Rails 3 is of interest to folks, and that support will come. But there will always be something new around the corner and we are chasing a moving target in that regards. Getting you folks to play with what works today will be greatly appreciated. Do report the blocking issues you run into. Most of those will apply to getting Rails 3 working as well anyway. Shri From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Mark Rendle Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 7:06 AM To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility MRI 1.9.1 is my Linux Ruby of choice, so I''m definitely in favour of 1.9 being the focus for IronRuby, and as soon as I can clone a 1.x branch I''ll be all over it, with Rails 3 testing as a focus. (Eventual aim: to prove IronRuby & Rails 3 as a cool Windows Azure solution). Mark On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 10:22 PM, Jimmy Schementi <Jimmy.Schementi at microsoft.com<mailto:Jimmy.Schementi at microsoft.com>> wrote: Good point, but slight overreaction =) Running Rails 3 and being 1.8.7 compatible can be completely different goals, as Rails 3 doesn''t use all of the 1.8.7 features. =) We can implement the features needed for Rails 3 for the releases after 1.0, so we may turn out to be compatible-enough with 1.8.7 for Rails 3. But, since we''re not going to run tests against both 1.8.7 and 1.9, we won''t be compatible enough to actually say "ruby-1.8.7 compatible". Plus, we''d like to start ripping out ruby-1.8 features from the 1.x releases, so that might be an impossible statement. Since 1.9 is the future of Ruby, we''re jumping directly to supporting it, as that will position IronRuby for great compatibility in the future, rather than trying to optimize for the current state of the ruby-world. If Rails 3 on IronRuby 1.1 or 1.2 is very important to people, than it''ll find a way of happening. But 1.8.x support is a dead-end, and not worth the IronRuby core team''s or contributor''s time. Plus, Matz ordered me to stop caring about 1.8 support, so I can''t say no to that =P Are there other reasons why it''s important for IronRuby to be ruby-1.8.7 compatible? If not, I''d prefer to just prioritize any changes needed for "Rails 3 support", rather than 1.8.7 support. ~Jimmy From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org> [mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org>] On Behalf Of Orion Edwards Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 1:51 PM To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core at rubyforge.org> Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility> IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible > IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatibleMy fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the ability to run it will do little for IronRuby''s image in the wider Ruby community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about weather it can run Rails or not). +1. While it seems logical to go down the path jimmy mentioned, It looks like what will happen is that rails3 won''t run on IronRuby at all until the 1.x releases build up 1.9 compat to a decent enough point and stabilize. Is 1.9 compat a big deal? It seems like it would be a ton of work to implement 1.9 compatibility in a stable way - thereby leaving IronRuby unable to run rails 3 for a long long time... _______________________________________________ Ironruby-core mailing list Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org<mailto:Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100216/21ae91cf/attachment-0001.html>
On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 12:30 PM, Jim Deville <jdeville at microsoft.com>wrote:> I honestly don?t think that shipping a 1.0 will delay any future release by > much. I also don?t think that a Rails 3 release would hurt the progress > towards 1.9. Unless something major changes, I believe all of the 1.8.7 > features we are currently lacking for Rails 3 are also 1.9 features. >Then that sounds like a great idea then :-) Personally I won''t be running rails3 on IronRuby (due to the fact that I''m not working on any webapps at all), but I would like to see rails3 support being not too far behind the release of rails3 itself. Rails is the main drawcard for ruby, and I believe IronRuby would lose credibility by not being able to run rails 3 (even though nobody may actually run it anyway) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20100217/707eccd2/attachment.html>