I think a “sane subset” of supported web servers is the way to go. For
instance, no one uses webrick anymore (most popular is mongrel for
development and mongrel+apache/lighttpd for production), so supporting
webrick isn’t super-important. I completely agree w/the importance of
being web-server agnostic. Also, webrick is a pure ruby app, so by
definition we’ll want to make it work in the long run.
Btw, this is really cool Wayne =)
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Wayne K.
Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 4:30 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Ironruby-core] Towards Rails on .NET
Below is a table summarizing the extension libraries that are needed by
a number of simple Rails use cases. These libraries are implemented in
Matz’s Ruby Interpreter in C code rather than in Ruby code, so we’ll
need to port or at least wrap them in some way.
Gem install rails
Rails create app
WEBrick process static html page
WEBrick process dynamic controller page
IIS CGI dispatch
I’d like to start working on some of these libraries, but first want to
check who is already working on what. I understand that John M. is
working on a YAML port and according to the WIKI, Eduardo Flores is
working on stringio and Curt H. is working on strscan. Is this
list correct and complete. Is anyone else already working on any of
To support these simple use cases, typically only a small number of
functions from these libraries is actually needed. If you are going to
work on any of these libraries, I can provide you with a list of the
actual functions and with the exact signature/overrides that are
actually used by these use cases. Obviously, other functions will also
be needed long term, but by implementing these functions first we can
get basic Rails functionality happening sooner.
Note, there are many different web server options that we could persue.
We could for example not worry about WEBrick and go straight to IIS as a
host and so avoid implementing the socket library. Ultimately, I think
we want to be web server agnostic, That is, we should aim to provide a
drop in replacement for “rubyw.exe” that works regardless of which web
server (IIS, Apache, WEBrick, Mongrel, etc) that administrators choose
to adopt. That said, Windows is currently considered a second class
platform for deploying Rails and the setup can be quite complex and
buggy in some configurations. In the longer term we should aim to
improve this situation. For production Rails we’ll want to support IIS
7.0 well on server machines, but for those that just want to try it out,
I believe we should also make sure it can be made to work on desktop
machines such as mine with IIS 5 and XP.