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

[Philip Brown]

On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Ben Walton <bwalton at opencsw.org> wrote:
> Excerpts from Philip Brown's message of Fri Apr 09 14:37:39 -0400 2010:
>
>> Is ruby1.9 explicitly designed to be incompatible with 1.8?
>> (if so, the writers need to learn what major numbering means :-} )
>
> No, it's not intentionally breaking things, but it is a transitional
> step on the way to 2.0.  Things have changed.  Many modules will work,
> but others won't...especially binary modules.
>
> Although I haven't followed it closely for a while, 1.9 was not
> originally intended for general use.


This sounds... quite bad.

>> 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?
>
> It doesn't work like that, unfortunately.  If you're running 1.8 with
> a Rails stack (installed locally as gems, outside of the pkg world)
> and all of a sudden we drop 1.9 in the place of 1.8, you're going to
> annoy a lot[2] of people.

Technically, that's Not Our Problem, until we package something in
that category.

We might approach this, by migrating CSWruby to 1.9, but then providing 1.8
as "ruby_old" or something?

(I really dont like having "18" when it's really "1.8". Yes I know we
do that for bdb. I hate that :-/ )



> People want both.  Some will _need_ both, at least for a while.

I dont think mangling our namespace quasi-permenantly, for a temporary
benefit, is a positive thing.




> If apps want to move their dependencies to 1.9 instead, that's fine
> with me, but we can't simply roll over the old version.

Would you care to test out our existing ruby-using packages, and
verify whether or not they will work with 1.9 ?

If yu find even one that does not work, you could stop without testing
the others, and report that one.

Otherwise... if they DO all work.. seems like  "upgrade ruby, provide
ruby_old" might be our best course of action?






meanwhile, you are of course welcome to toss your ruby 1.9 packages in
testing, (and/or "experimental?") if you have not done so already, and
thus people who want them can relatively easily grab them there, for
now.