Mongrel development - Dec 2007 - First Shoot, many more to appear: Rails on Ruby 1.9

Guys,

Subject says everything:

http://www.frederico-araujo.com/2007/12/18/my-first-successful-booting-rails-2-0-2-ruby-1-9-attempt

Even ActionView uses Proc.binding (which isn''t correctly supported in
1.9) it appears that lot of folks will try to put their hands in Ruby
1.9 when it comes out, and of course, try to get Rails with Mongrel
running in it.

Zed, Wayne, Evan and ry: maybe we need an official statement about it?
(put in the web site?)

I know Evan did a blog post about it, but still, we need to work on
something that:

Warn the user on running mongrel with 1.9 (until we got it working).
Limit the gem to work only with 1.8 line (instead of >= 1.8.4)
#=> ''>= 1.8.4'', ''< 1.9.0''
or
#=> ''~> 1.8.4''
?

Do a RUBY_VERSION check in the code and warn the user about it.

Thoughts?

-- 
Luis Lavena
Multimedia systems
-
A common mistake that people make when trying to design
something completely foolproof is to underestimate
the ingenuity of complete fools.
Douglas Adams

Hello,

how about our good and unstable trunk?

renmazuo:/tmp/rails_trunk/rails_ruby19_app# ./script/server
=> Booting Mongrel (use ''script/server webrick'' to force
WEBrick)
=> Rails application starting on http://0.0.0.0:3000
=> Call with -d to detach
=> Ctrl-C to shutdown server
Tue, 18 Dec 2007 12:30:35 GMT | info | Starting Mongrel listening at
0.0.0.0:3000, further information can be found in log/mongrel-0.0.0.0-3000.log
/tmp/rails_trunk/rails_ruby19_app/vendor/rails/activerecord/lib/active_record/associations/association_proxy.rb:8:
warning: undefining `object_id'' may cause serious problem

Tad?, and mongrel is running and serving requests with ruby1.9 and rails 2.0.2
trunk :)

Only change I made was to swap File.exists? (that is deprecated) by File.exist?
at lib/mongrel/logger.rb and compile mongrel through setup.rb only. As I already
commited this change to svn right now, the ones who update it may have a clean
1.9 run.

So, now that rails run on top of it, i''ll start to test test test test
test test and test.

If we drop support requirement for fastthread in mongrel 1.2, mongrel will be
1.9 compatible out-of-the-box.

Cheers,

filipe {
  @             icewall.org
  GPG        1024D/A6BA423E
  Jabber  lautert at jabber.ru
}

On Tue, 18 Dec 2007, Luis Lavena wrote:
> Guys,
>
> Subject says everything:
>
>
http://www.frederico-araujo.com/2007/12/18/my-first-successful-booting-rails-2-0-2-ruby-1-9-attempt
>
> Even ActionView uses Proc.binding (which isn''t correctly supported
in
> 1.9) it appears that lot of folks will try to put their hands in Ruby
> 1.9 when it comes out, and of course, try to get Rails with Mongrel
> running in it.
>
> Zed, Wayne, Evan and ry: maybe we need an official statement about it?
> (put in the web site?)
>
> I know Evan did a blog post about it, but still, we need to work on
> something that:
>
> Warn the user on running mongrel with 1.9 (until we got it working).
> Limit the gem to work only with 1.8 line (instead of >= 1.8.4)
> #=> ''>= 1.8.4'', ''< 1.9.0''
> or
> #=> ''~> 1.8.4''
> ?
>
> Do a RUBY_VERSION check in the code and warn the user about it.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> -- 
> Luis Lavena
> Multimedia systems
> -
> A common mistake that people make when trying to design
> something completely foolproof is to underestimate
> the ingenuity of complete fools.
> Douglas Adams
> _______________________________________________
> Mongrel-development mailing list
> Mongrel-development at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-development
>

On Dec 18, 2007 9:42 AM, Filipe <filipe at icewall.org>
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> how about our good and unstable trunk?
>
> renmazuo:/tmp/rails_trunk/rails_ruby19_app# ./script/server
> => Booting Mongrel (use ''script/server webrick'' to
force WEBrick)
> => Rails application starting on http://0.0.0.0:3000
> => Call with -d to detach
> => Ctrl-C to shutdown server
> Tue, 18 Dec 2007 12:30:35 GMT | info | Starting Mongrel listening at
0.0.0.0:3000, further information can be found in log/mongrel-0.0.0.0-3000.log
>
/tmp/rails_trunk/rails_ruby19_app/vendor/rails/activerecord/lib/active_record/associations/association_proxy.rb:8:
warning: undefining `object_id'' may cause serious problem
>
> Tad?, and mongrel is running and serving requests with ruby1.9 and rails
2.0.2 trunk :)
>
Yeah, running doesn''t mean it will work as good as 1.8.

There are still issues we need to address like Threading, naive example:
Taking 2 pasties from 2006 about mutex/sync issues (mostly what
mongrel currently does to gard from Rails):

http://pastie.caboo.se/10194
http://pastie.caboo.se/10317

1.8.6: they work.
1.9.0: they fail:

pastie-10194.rb:34:in `initialize'': can''t create Thread (0)
(ThreadError)
        from pastie-10194.rb:34:in `new''
        from pastie-10194.rb:34:in `block in run''
        from pastie-10194.rb:30:in `loop''
        from pastie-10194.rb:30:in `run''
        from pastie-10194.rb:52:in `<main>''
> Only change I made was to swap File.exists? (that is deprecated) by
File.exist? at lib/mongrel/logger.rb and compile mongrel through setup.rb only.
As I already commited this change to svn right now, the ones who update it may
have a clean 1.9 run.
>
> So, now that rails run on top of it, i''ll start to test test test
test test test and test.
>
I think I described the situation: more users will start firing huge
projects into 1.9 and mostly they will blame Mongrel for all of them
(as usual, if not, check mongrel-users list).
> If we drop support requirement for fastthread in mongrel 1.2, mongrel will
be 1.9 compatible out-of-the-box.
>
Is not that simple, but anyway... be my guess, try it ourself and
shoot you in your foot :-P

-- 
Luis Lavena
Multimedia systems
-
A common mistake that people make when trying to design
something completely foolproof is to underestimate
the ingenuity of complete fools.
Douglas Adams

On Ter, 2007-12-18 at 11:24 -0300, Luis Lavena wrote:
> On Dec 18, 2007 9:42 AM, Filipe <filipe at icewall.org> wrote:
> > ...
> > Tad?, and mongrel is running and serving requests with ruby1.9 and
rails 2.0.2 trunk :)
> >
> 
> Yeah, running doesn''t mean it will work as good as 1.8.
For sure :) What I want at first is to make mongrel ruby1.9 compatible. If we
can make it build and at least start, so wee can get more people to test it.

You know, we can do a lot of tests but we will never fire all the bugs that are
hidden.. so we can release early and got help from users. What we can do is
advise users that mongrel + ruby1.9 is a dangerous combination, and that
compatible != stable.

Cheers,

filipe