[csw-pkgsubmissions] newpkgs ruby19, ruby19dev, ruby19ri, ruby19sa(...)

Philip Brown phil at bolthole.com
Fri Apr 9 20:37:39 CEST 2010

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Fri Apr 09 13:55:23 -0400 2010:
>> Errr.. and existing ruby is ruby 1.8.
>> So... why are you making a new (named) set of packages like this?
> Lots of stuff doesn't run on 1.9 yet (modules not forward ported,
> etc).  I believe, but would need to verify that Rails still doesn't
> play nicely on 1.9.  Thus, many shops still want/need 1.8.  The 1.9
> version offers many language improvements and has a much faster vm
> engine, so it's no longer as slow.  For the foreseeable future, both
> versions will be made available.

Is ruby1.9 explicitly designed to be incompatible with 1.8?
(if so, the writers need to learn what major numbering means :-} )

If incompatibility is a bug, rather than a feature, I dont think this
is a good way for us to go.

As a side comment.. We only have a limited (under 10?) set of packages
that need ruby.
If all of our packages are fine with the newer ruby, maybe we should
just bump CSWruby, reguardless?

More information about the pkgsubmissions mailing list