# Contributing? **URL:** \ **Category:** IronRuby\ **Created:** [October 23, 2010, 2:19am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941 "2010-10-23T02:19:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Dobai-Pataky\_BSSSSl](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/d/77aa72/32.png) [@Dobai-Pataky\_BSSSSl](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Dobai-Pataky_BSSSSl)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 2:19am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/1 "2010-10-23T02:19:52Z")
With a brave new world ahead for IronRuby, what do you all think about the following ideas? 1. Move to GitHub - I won’t likely contribute if I have to use CodePlex. And I’d like to contribute. Can we do like the rest of Mono and make GitHub the central repository and source of all truth? Please? 2. Detach IronPython - Looking through the code, it seems that IronPython is in the same repo. I’m sure this is a holdover of how Microsoft had everything organized. And I’m sure it made sense then, but I don’t think it makes sense now. I’d like to work on IronRuby, and I honestly don’t care about having to check IronPython. Now that the DLR API is fixed, and there is no longer one Microsoft group in charge of both projects, can we move these into separate repos? 3. Detach from Visual Studio - I’m not on Windows, and I won’t be using Visual Studio. I’d prefer everything to build with rake tasks on Windows and Mono. I assume things are the way they are right now because of Microsoft’s build process. And right now it does not seem possible for me to build without Visual Studio. What about devs who are using MonoDevelop? Or any of the more powerful text editors? I’m convinced this is a major hurdle to getting many of the other Rubyist language implementors involved. Assuming I am not alone on this, is it possible we can make this project reflect the realities of the majority of folks that would like to contribute? 4. Remove ancillary projects into their own repos - IronRuby.Rack should live in its own repo, IMO. So should the Visual Studio tools. This is similar to separating IronPython into its own repo, but it needs to go further. Are there any reasons this should not be done? What else do you guys think needs to change now that IronRuby is free from Microsoft’s processes? ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 3:50am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/2 "2010-10-23T03:50:05Z")
A couple thoughts below: On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 8:10 PM, Mike M. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > With a brave new world ahead for IronRuby, what do you all think about the > following ideas? > > 1. Move to GitHub - I won’t likely contribute if I have to use CodePlex. And > I’d like to contribute. Can we do like the rest of Mono and make GitHub the > central repository and source of all truth? Please? [http://github.com/ironruby/ironruby](http://github.com/ironruby/ironruby) My understanding is that Codeplex is used only for end user distribution and bug tracking > 3)Detachfrom Visual Studio - I’m not on Windows, and I won’t be using > Visual Studio. I’d prefer everything to build with rake tasks on Windows and > Mono. I assume things are the way they are right now because of Microsoft’s > build process. And right now it does not seem possible for me to build > without Visual Studio. What about devs who are using MonoDevelop? Or any of > the more powerful text editors? I’m convinced this is a major hurdle to > getting many of the other Rubyist language implementors involved. Assuming I > am not alone on this, is it possible we can make this project reflect the > realities of the majority of folks that would like to contribute? You can certainly build without VS, this has always been the case. All you need is msbuild or xbuild for the solution files, in the past there have been Rake files as part of the repo from very early on.. but they seem to have disappeared.. anyone know what happened? I’m taking a look now on building under mono on linux, it’s something me and Ivan were working on earlier in the year and this seems like a good time to revisit. – Michael L. IronRuby MVP > **[Michael Letterle's Blog ·](https://blog.prokrams.com/)** ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 3:55am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/3 "2010-10-23T03:55:05Z")
1. IronRuby is on github. I has been there for a while. There is no source code on CodePlex. The only CodePlex service we use is the bug tracker. 2. It is not a holdover. It makes a lot of sense actually for at least the following reasons: a) Some IronRuby tests test interop between these languages. So there is a direct dependency. When you debug issues in language interop you need to have IronPython source code as well to step thru and make sense of the interactions. b) DLR has two parts - the “inner ring” that shipped in .NET Framework 4.0 and the “outer ring”, which hasn’t shipped. Although the outer ring is pretty stable there are still many improvements that can/should be done. Obviously when you change the DLR you should run tests for both languages so that you don’t break anything. Thus IronPython’s test suite in the repo is handy. Also, if you change public API in the outer ring you might need to change both IronPython and IronRuby. All of this could be done in stages across different repos and even source control systems, but that’s obviously much more complicated than having it just work. Is size of the repo really an issue? If not, what is? 1. It is absolutely possible to build without Visual Studio. On Mono you can build using xbuild. Sometimes Mono’s xbuild might have a bug but I can assure you that Mono guys are more than happy to fix it asap if it breaks IronRuby or IronPython builds. Doesn’t MonoDevelop support .csproj files? I have no experience with it, but I would assume it does. The only part of the repo that is Visual Studio specific is (not surprisingly) Visual Studio integration in the Tools directory. Building a separate rake build system is just a redundancy that is difficult to maintain. Trust me, we tried. The less duplication in the build infrastructure the better. 2. We have an installer builder in the MSI directory that builds the entire IronRuby.msi and IronPython.msi from command line. These installers include Visual Studio integration so it needs to be there. Of course we can come up with some sub-module structuring of the repo that allows you to make a local enlistment with VS and without VS. That might be the way to go. Though, again, why spend time on changing the infrastructure? Shouldn’t we focus on implementing features and fixing bugs instead? Does the size of the repo bother you? Be assured that me and Dino have spent a lot of time to make sure no unnecessary process (Microsoft’s or not) is needed when working on IronRuby and IronPython. There might be a few small things to clean up that were needed at Microsoft and are not needed now. I’ll be happy to make the changes. Two of them that I can think of right now are removing “LCA\_RESTRICTED” and TFS bindings from the solutions. Other than that there is not much. Any ideas how to make the development easier on Windows, Linux or MacOS are indeed welcome. Just be aware there might be good reasons behind the current repo setup and virtually none of them would be Microsoft process requirements. I’ll be happy to explain them should you have any questions. Thanks, Tomas From: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid [[mailto:removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid)] On Behalf Of Mike M. Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 5:10 PM To: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid Subject: [Ironruby-core] Contributing? With a brave new world ahead for IronRuby, what do you all think about the following ideas? 1. Move to GitHub - I won’t likely contribute if I have to use CodePlex. And I’d like to contribute. Can we do like the rest of Mono and make GitHub the central repository and source of all truth? Please? 2. Detach IronPython - Looking through the code, it seems that IronPython is in the same repo. I’m sure this is a holdover of how Microsoft had everything organized. And I’m sure it made sense then, but I don’t think it makes sense now. I’d like to work on IronRuby, and I honestly don’t care about having to check IronPython. Now that the DLR API is fixed, and there is no longer one Microsoft group in charge of both projects, can we move these into separate repos? 3. Detach from Visual Studio - I’m not on Windows, and I won’t be using Visual Studio. I’d prefer everything to build with rake tasks on Windows and Mono. I assume things are the way they are right now because of Microsoft’s build process. And right now it does not seem possible for me to build without Visual Studio. What about devs who are using MonoDevelop? Or any of the more powerful text editors? I’m convinced this is a major hurdle to getting many of the other Rubyist language implementors involved. Assuming I am not alone on this, is it possible we can make this project reflect the realities of the majority of folks that would like to contribute? 4. Remove ancillary projects into their own repos - IronRuby.Rack should live in its own repo, IMO. So should the Visual Studio tools. This is similar to separating IronPython into its own repo, but it needs to go further. Are there any reasons this should not be done? What else do you guys think needs to change now that IronRuby is free from Microsoft’s processes? ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 3:56am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/4 "2010-10-23T03:56:58Z")
I would caution you against moving too far away from Microsoft Technology, lest you alienate Windows developers. 1. If this project is going to be owned by Mono, then it would be reasonable to move to GitHub. But to drop CodePlex just because you feel like being stubborn isn’t. 2. One of the biggest barriers for Windows developers who want to contribute to Mono is the project/build system. When looking at it for the first time it is really hard to just figure out where to start. And they certainly don’t want to go back to editing source files with notepad. So while being able to build without Visual Studio is important, be careful not to remove the VS/MSBuild option. Jonathan A. ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 6:03am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/5 "2010-10-23T06:03:44Z")
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 7:02 PM, Jonathan A. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid)wrote: > I would caution you against moving too far away from Microsoft Technology, > lest you alienate Windows developers. I don’t think Windows developers could be anymore alienated from IronRuby. > 1. If this project is going to be owned by Mono, then it would be > reasonable to move to GitHub. But to drop CodePlex just because you feel > like being stubborn isn’t. Dropping CodePlex because it requires some Uber Visual Studio product to access the code repo and make code contributions is reasonable, and not some emotional reaction. Gladly this doesn’t seem to be the case anymore. ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 6:12am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/6 "2010-10-23T06:12:29Z")
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Tomas M. \< [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid)\> wrote: > 1. It is not a holdover. It makes a lot of sense actually for at least > the following reasons: > > a) Some IronRuby tests test interop between these languages. So there is a > direct dependency. When you debug issues in language interop you need to > have IronPython source code as well to step thru and make sense of the > interactions. I don’t understand why the code needs to exist within the same git repo for this then. Can you not have a Visual Studio solution that includes multiple projects with their own repository? Can’t you have your automated build system pull both the IronRuby and IronPython projects to run the integration tests? > b) DLR has two parts the inner ring that shipped in .NET Framework > 4.0 and the outer ring, which hasnt shipped. Although the outer ring is > pretty stable there are still many improvements that can/should be done. > Obviously when you change the DLR you should run tests for both languages so > that you dont break anything. Thus IronPythons test suite in the repo is > handy. Also, if you change public API in the outer ring you might need to > change both IronPython and IronRuby. All of this could be done in stages > across different repos and even source control systems, but thats obviously > much more complicated than having it just work. I assumed the DLR was fixed. If that is not the case then shouldn’t the DLR should be its own separate git repo as well? Is size of the repo really an issue? If not, what is? > No, its not the size of the repo, rather the amount of tangental code. As someone who hasn’t looked at the code for well over a year, I am struck by the amount of orthogonal concerns that are front and center. I find it too busy and off-putting as a developer looking to become familiar with the code or make a small contribution. I don’t doubt there aren’t reasons it is the way it is, just that it can be better if you want to really open the floodgates of contributions. ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 6:16am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/7 "2010-10-23T06:16:51Z")
> > 1. If this project is going to be owned by Mono, then it would be > > reasonable to move to GitHub. But to drop CodePlex just because you feel > > like being stubborn isn’t. > > Dropping CodePlex because it requires some Uber Visual Studio product to > access the code repo and make code contributions is reasonable, and not some > emotional reaction. Gladly this doesn’t seem to be the case anymore. > > * * * Uh.. you know it doesn’t, right? Codeplex supports SVN and Mercurial and there are free TFS tools available in any case. [http://codeplex.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=Source%20Control&version=1](http://codeplex.codeplex.com/wikipage?title=Source%20Control&version=1) – Michael L. IronRuby MVP > **[Michael Letterle's Blog ·](https://blog.prokrams.com/)** ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 6:30am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/8 "2010-10-23T06:30:37Z")
Along the lines of IronRuby on mono, a small change was required for now since Mono doesn’t implement one of the newer Monitor.TryEnter overloads, see my branch here: [http://github.com/mletterle/ironruby/tree/linux](http://github.com/mletterle/ironruby/tree/linux) compiles with: xbuild /property:TreatWarningsAsErrors=false /property:DefineConstants=“DEBUG MONO” Ruby.csproj Working on getting IronRuby.Console compiled now… already ran into a casing issue \>.\< On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Jonathan A. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > don’t want to go back to editing source files with notepad. So while being > > > 1. Move to GitHub - I won’t likely contribute if I have to use CodePlex. > > Visual Studio. I’d prefer everything to build with rake tasks on Windows and > > further. Are there any reasons this should not be done? > > – > > Jonathan A. > > 619-933-8527 > > * * * > > Ironruby-core mailing list > [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) > [http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core](http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core) – Michael L. IronRuby MVP > **[Michael Letterle's Blog ·](https://blog.prokrams.com/)** ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 6:31am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/9 "2010-10-23T06:31:53Z")
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Michael L. \< [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid)\> wrote: > [http://github.com/ironruby/ironruby](http://github.com/ironruby/ironruby) > > My understanding is that Codeplex is used only for end user > distribution and bug tracking Good to know. Last time I was paying attention this was not the case. The commits I’ve seen through twitter seemed to be syncing commits from Microsoft’s internal system out. I readily admin I am ignorant of the truth however. 🙂 You can certainly build without VS, this has always been the case. > All you need is msbuild or xbuild for the solution files, in the past > there have been Rake files as part of the repo from very early on.. > but they seem to have disappeared.. anyone know what happened? > > I’m taking a look now on building under mono on linux, it’s something > me and Ivan were working on earlier in the year and this seems like a > good time to revisit. Excellent. I’d prefer to have rake be the official way to test and build, since that is what every other Ruby project I work on does. ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 7:06am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/10 "2010-10-23T07:06:56Z")
The Rake files were deleted because they were hard to maintain and redundant. ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 8:01am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/11 "2010-10-23T08:01:25Z")
On Oct 22, 2010, at 10:00 PM, Jim D. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > The Rake files were deleted because they were hard to maintain and redundant. Not all of them. [http://github.com/ironruby/ironruby/blob/master/Rakefile](http://github.com/ironruby/ironruby/blob/master/Rakefile) ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 8:05am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/12 "2010-10-23T08:05:49Z")
On Oct 22, 2010, at 10:13 PM, Michael L. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > Uh.. you know it doesn’t, right? Obviously I don’t. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 8:35am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/13 "2010-10-23T08:35:50Z")
> Dropping CodePlex because it requires some Uber Visual Studio product to > access the code repo and make code contributions is reasonable, and not > some > emotional reaction. While academic at this point, I would like to reiterate that you don’t need Visual Studio for CodePlex, Subversion works just fine. In fact, Subversion is preferred over VS because it allows anonymous access the source control repository while VS requires at least developer status on the project. Jonathan ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 9:30am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/14 "2010-10-23T09:30:57Z")
On Oct 22, 2010, at 8:27 PM, Mike M. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > Dropping CodePlex because it requires some Uber Visual Studio product to access > the code repo and make code contributions is reasonable, and not some emotional > reaction. Gladly this doesn’t seem to be the case anymore. Or, has never been the case. I’ve used vim and mono on some pieces before, so the new arrangement doesn’t change anything except allow us to contribute directly to parts of the codebase we couldn’t before. 🙂 Ryan ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 9:54am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/15 "2010-10-23T09:54:14Z")
What do you need the “DEBUG MONO” constant for? The default “Debug” configuration doesn’t work? What version of Mono do you use? I think 2.8 should be the target for IronRUby. Tomas ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 9:55am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/16 "2010-10-23T09:55:30Z")
I don’t understand how three distinct github repos that I need to map into some directories on my disk whose relative location to each other is hardcoded in some scripts in each are better than a single repo that has a well-defined structure. The amount of code you need to know depends on the part you contribute to. If you work on IronRuby libraries you don’t need to even look at IronPython. It is indeed better to look there because similar functionality might already be implemented there. For example, if you worked on FFI you might want to check out IronPython’s CTypes and perhaps reuse some code. Why would you need to understand the entire code base if you needed to do a local change? Just don’t look where you don’t need to :). Building IronRuby is also simple - you just run xbuild Ruby.sln from Solution directory. Subsequent builds are incremental, so you don’t even need to build everything if you don’t change core components. I don’t see how this could be any simpler. Tomas From: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid [[mailto:removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid)] On Behalf Of Mike M. Sent: Friday, October 22, 2010 8:27 PM To: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] Contributing? On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 6:59 PM, Tomas M. \ wrote: 2) It is not a holdover. It makes a lot of sense actually for at least the following reasons: a) Some IronRuby tests test interop between these languages. So there is a direct dependency. When you debug issues in language interop you need to have IronPython source code as well to step thru and make sense of the interactions. I don’t understand why the code needs to exist within the same git repo for this then. Can you not have a Visual Studio solution that includes multiple projects with their own repository? Can’t you have your automated build system pull both the IronRuby and IronPython projects to run the integration tests? b) DLR has two parts - the “inner ring” that shipped in .NET Framework 4.0 and the “outer ring”, which hasn’t shipped. Although the outer ring is pretty stable there are still many improvements that can/should be done. Obviously when you change the DLR you should run tests for both languages so that you don’t break anything. Thus IronPython’s test suite in the repo is handy. Also, if you change public API in the outer ring you might need to change both IronPython and IronRuby. All of this could be done in stages across different repos and even source control systems, but that’s obviously much more complicated than having it just work. I assumed the DLR was fixed. If that is not the case then shouldn’t the DLR should be its own separate git repo as well? Is size of the repo really an issue? If not, what is? No, its not the size of the repo, rather the amount of tangental code. As someone who hasn’t looked at the code for well over a year, I am struck by the amount of orthogonal concerns that are front and center. I find it too busy and off-putting as a developer looking to become familiar with the code or make a small contribution. I don’t doubt there aren’t reasons it is the way it is, just that it can be better if you want to really open the floodgates of contributions. ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 10:23am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/17 "2010-10-23T10:23:45Z")
Jim, Jimmy, Tomas, and Miguel: Shri used to offer pair programming sessions to people interested in helping out with the project. I know at least a few participated, and I found it really helpful. Is there any chance of starting this up again? I don’t mean for you to necessarily be the ones to do it, but you might know some food candidates. This might help onboard people like Mike who are interested but unsure where to begin. Ryan Sent from my iPhone ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 1:40pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/18 "2010-10-23T13:40:50Z")
Well, it’s just the DEBUG constant and a MONO constant. I’m building with mono trunk, I added the MONO to the ifdef to use the Monitor.TryEnter(object) overload that is also used for CLR2. I couldn’t just use the CLR2 constant because that broke everything else. I’m going to look into adding the Monitor.TryEnter(object, bool) overloads to mono proper so this is just temporary. On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 3:19 AM, Tomas M. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] Contributing? > > > the first time it is really hard to just figure out where to start. > > > > > about the following ideas? > > > 3)Detachfrom Visual Studio - I’m not on Windows, and I won’t be > > > This is similar to separating IronPython into its own repo, but it > > * * * > > Ironruby-core mailing list > [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) > [http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core](http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core) – Michael L. IronRuby MVP > **[Michael Letterle's Blog ·](https://blog.prokrams.com/)** ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 3:05pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/19 "2010-10-23T15:05:32Z")
On Oct 23, 2010, at 1:30 AM, Tomas M. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > I don’t understand how three distinct github repos that I need to map into some > directories on my disk whose relative location to each other is hardcoded in some > scripts in each are better than a single repo that has a well-defined structure. You are speaking like someone responsible for both languages and the DLR. I’m making a suggestion as someone really only interested in IronRuby. The repo isn’t called “DynamicLanguages”, it’s called “IronRuby”, which is at best confusing. If only git had some way to define a link to another repository as some sort of sub module… As a Rubyist I’d like to run a rake task to build to each defined target and run the RubySpecs. It wouldn’t replace xbuild, just automate it. I don’t understand the pushback to this idea. Why not make a dedicated repo for IronRuby free of the ancillary projects and geared to someone like me? And likewise make the IronPython repo friendly to our Pythonic friends? > The amount of code you need to know depends on the part you contribute to. If > you work on IronRuby libraries you don’t need to even look at IronPython. It is > indeed better to look there because similar functionality might already be > implemented there. For example, if you worked on FFI you might want to check out > IronPython’s CTypes and perhaps reuse some code. Why would you need to understand > the entire code base if you needed to do a local change? Just don’t look where you > don’t need to J. Building IronRuby is also simple – you just run xbuild Ruby.sln > from Solution directory. Subsequent builds are incremental, so you don’t even need > to build everything if you don’t change core components. I don’t see how this > could be any simpler. Unfortunately I do see how this could be simpler. ---
**Author:** ![mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/53a042/32.png) [@mike-moscow](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mike-moscow)\ **Post date:** [October 23, 2010, 5:19pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941/20 "2010-10-23T17:19:16Z")
Maybe it is time to come up with the why’s?? This is how I see the Iron languages. The languages are built on top of the DLR for Interoperability between the languages and to Ensure that the DLR offers the basic building blocks for Dynamic languages and to the base CLR. (be that mono or the CLR now that it is oss) the Iron languages are built so that a Rubiest will feel comfortable in the .net platform or a pythonist for that matter. But more importantly that the libraries built can be used clr/dlr wide. IOW a Ruby library can be used (in theory) by a rubiest for sure, but also a pythonist, a c sharper, a Vber, and for that matter a Fsharper. Now to get working on my programming skills so I can contribute in the future. took a 17 year diversion into equipment repair. But to me the single most important part of the project is the interoperability it offers. D From: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2010 06:44:16 -0600 To: removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] Contributing? On Oct 23, 2010, at 1:30 AM, Tomas M. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: I dont understand how three distinct github repos that I need to map into some directories on my disk whose relative location to each other is hardcoded in some scripts in each are better than a single repo that has a well-defined structure. You are speaking like someone responsible for both languages and the DLR. I’m making a suggestion as someone really only interested in IronRuby. The repo isn’t called “DynamicLanguages”, it’s called “IronRuby”, which is at best confusing. If only git had some way to define a link to another repository as some sort of sub module… As a Rubyist I’d like to run a rake task to build to each defined target and run the RubySpecs. It wouldn’t replace xbuild, just automate it. I don’t understand the pushback to this idea. Why not make a dedicated repo for IronRuby free of the ancillary projects and geared to someone like me? And likewise make the IronPython repo friendly to our Pythonic friends? The amount of code you need to know depends on the part you contribute to. If you work on IronRuby libraries you dont need to even look at IronPython. It is indeed better to look there because similar functionality might already be implemented there. For example, if you worked on FFI you might want to check out IronPythons CTypes and perhaps reuse some code. Why would you need to understand the entire code base if you needed to do a local change? Just dont look where you dont need to J. Building IronRuby is also simple you just run xbuild Ruby.sln from Solution directory. Subsequent builds are incremental, so you dont even need to build everything if you dont change core components. I dont see how this could be any simpler. Unfortunately I do see how this could be simpler. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Ironruby-core mailing list removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid [http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core](http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core) [Next page](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/contributing/197941.md?page=2)