It seems a shame that the 1.0 release of IronRuby isn’t going to be able
to
run Rails 3, since they seem to be landing at around the same time. I
guess
the differences between MRI 1.8.6 and 1.8.7 are pretty major, though, so
not
much can be done about it at this stage?
Any idea how long after the 1.0 RTM we might start seeing 1.8.7 (or
1.9.x?)
compatibility?
Cheers,
Mark
+1 !
Any idea how long after the 1.0 RTM we might start seeing 1.8.7 (or
1.9.x?)
Along these lines:
Are you interested in the 1.8.7 features, or just things like Rails
compat (which 1.9.x compat would give)
JD
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Orion E.
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 11:52 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility
+1 !
Any idea how long after the 1.0 RTM we might start seeing 1.8.7 (or
1.9.x?) compatibility?
For me it is just Rails 3.0 compat 
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 22:20, Jim D. [email protected]
wrote:
Are you interested in the 1.8.7 features, or just things like Rails compat
(which 1.9.x compat would give)
In all honesty (and regardless of Rails 3.0 compat) I think that
working on 1.8.7 features would be a waste of time and that the target
for a post-1.0 major release of IronRuby should be set to 1.9. But
anyway, this is coming from one of the few ruby devs that doesn’t care
a bit about Rails 
–
Daniele A.
http://www.clorophilla.net/
http://twitter.com/JoL1hAHN
Personally I’d like the 1.8.7 library changes (The Enumerable module has
a
bunch more useful stuff in 1.8.7) but beyond that I can’t actually
remember
what the changes were, so I don’t really miss them
If IronRuby has 1.9.x compat, then the library changes would get pulled
in
for that, so the 1.8.7 changes are probably not worth worrying about.
I believe 1.9 includes most of the changes that are in 1.8.7 and 1.8.8.
JD
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Orion E.
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 5:17 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility
Personally I’d like the 1.8.7 library changes (The Enumerable module has
a bunch more useful stuff in 1.8.7) but beyond that I can’t actually
remember what the changes were, so I don’t really miss them 
If IronRuby has 1.9.x compat, then the library changes would get pulled
in for that, so the 1.8.7 changes are probably not worth worrying about.
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Jim D.
<[email protected]mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
Along these lines:
Are you interested in the 1.8.7 features, or just things like Rails
compat (which 1.9.x compat would give)
JD
From:
[email protected]mailto:[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Orion E.
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 11:52 AM
To: [email protected]mailto:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility
+1 !
Any idea how long after the 1.0 RTM we might start seeing 1.8.7 (or
1.9.x?) compatibility?
Mainly Rails 3.0 compatibility. I’d far rather 1.9.x than 1.8.7, but not
at
the expense of Rails compatibility taking longer.
Mark
+1 for 1.9
Once you consider that by the time IronRuby claims 1.8.7 compat Ruby
will
likely have a 1.8.9, I think going for 1.9 just makes the most sense.
Everything else is moving or has moved to 1.9, so I’d rather see that
happen.
Ryan R.
Email: [email protected]
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley
Blog: http://wizardsofsmart.net/
Twitter: @panesofglass
Website: http://panesofglass.org/
+1 for 1.9
Met vriendelijke groeten - Best regards - Salutations
Ivan Porto C.
Blog: http://flanders.co.nz
Twitter: http://twitter.com/casualjim
Author of IronRuby in Action (http://manning.com/carrero)
Here’s the current compatibility plan, let me know if this concerns
anyone:
IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatible
Active development will still happens in the master branch, which
will be only focused on ruby-1.9 support. This means the master
branch will lose ruby-1.8.6 compatibility as breaking changes
between ruby-1.8.6 and ruby-1.9 are implemented. However, we’ll
probably look at implementing 1.8.7 features that are also in 1.9,
so we might get ruby-1.8.7 compatibility as a byproduct of that,
but it’s not something we’ll be testing.
Most ruby implementations are also moving away from supporting 1.8
and 1.9 in the same codebase as well. Even more extreme, MacRuby is
completely skipping 1.8 compatibility, but that technically makes sense
as they are a fork of the 1.9 codebase.
~Jimmy
Here’s the current compatibility plan, let me know if this concerns
anyone:
IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatible
Active development will still happens in the master branch, which will
be only focused on ruby-1.9 support. This means the master branch will
lose ruby-1.8.6 compatibility as breaking changes between ruby-1.8.6
and ruby-1.9 are implemented. However, we’ll probably look at
implementing 1.8.7 features that are also in 1.9, so we might get
ruby-1.8.7 compatibility as a byproduct of that, but it’s not
something we’ll be testing.
Most ruby implementations are also moving away from supporting 1.8 and
1.9 in the same codebase as well. Even more extreme, MacRuby is
completely skipping 1.8 compatibility, but that technically makes sense
as they are a fork of the 1.9 codebase.
~Jimmy
How much effort is it to get 1.8.7 compatible? How much to get 1.9
compatible?
What is driving the push to release 1.0?
My fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the
ability to run it will do little for IronRuby’s image in the wider Ruby
community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about
weather it
can run Rails or not).
–
Will G.
http://hotgazpacho.org/
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 4:17 PM, Jimmy S. <
IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible
IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatible
My fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the
ability to run it will do little for IronRuby’s image in the wider Ruby
community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about weather it
can run Rails or not).
+1.
While it seems logical to go down the path jimmy mentioned, It looks
like
what will happen is that rails3 won’t run on IronRuby at all until the
1.x
releases build up 1.9 compat to a decent enough point and stabilize.
Is 1.9 compat a big deal? It seems like it would be a ton of work
to implement 1.9 compatibility in a stable way - thereby leaving
IronRuby
unable to run rails 3 for a long long time…
DISCLAIMER: We haven’t discussed this yet, I’m just tossing it out to
get thoughts.
One option may be to put Rails 3 compat as the focus for 1.1, so that
we do 1.0 in a few months on our current timeline, then put the focus
into implementing the needed things for Rails 3. After that we can
continue onto 1.9 support.
Thoughts?
JD
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Orion E.
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 1:51 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility
IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible
IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatible
My fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the
ability to run it will do little for IronRuby’s image in the wider Ruby
community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about
weather it can run Rails or not).
+1.
While it seems logical to go down the path jimmy mentioned, It looks
like what will happen is that rails3 won’t run on IronRuby at all until
the 1.x releases build up 1.9 compat to a decent enough point and
stabilize.
Is 1.9 compat a big deal? It seems like it would be a ton of work to
implement 1.9 compatibility in a stable way - thereby leaving IronRuby
unable to run rails 3 for a long long time…
Good point, but slight overreaction =)
Running Rails 3 and being 1.8.7 compatible can be completely different
goals, as Rails 3 doesn’t use all of the 1.8.7 features. =) We can
implement the features needed for Rails 3 for the releases after 1.0, so
we may turn out to be compatible-enough with 1.8.7 for Rails 3. But,
since we’re not going to run tests against both 1.8.7 and 1.9, we won’t
be compatible enough to actually say “ruby-1.8.7 compatible”. Plus, we’d
like to start ripping out ruby-1.8 features from the 1.x releases, so
that might be an impossible statement.
Since 1.9 is the future of Ruby, we’re jumping directly to supporting
it, as that will position IronRuby for great compatibility in the
future, rather than trying to optimize for the current state of the
ruby-world. If Rails 3 on IronRuby 1.1 or 1.2 is very important to
people, than it’ll find a way of happening. But 1.8.x support is a
dead-end, and not worth the IronRuby core team’s or contributor’s time.
Plus, Matz ordered me to stop caring about 1.8 support, so I can’t say
no to that =P
Are there other reasons why it’s important for IronRuby to be ruby-1.8.7
compatible? If not, I’d prefer to just prioritize any changes needed for
“Rails 3 support”, rather than 1.8.7 support.
~Jimmy
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Orion E.
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 1:51 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility
IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible
IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatible
My fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the
ability to run it will do little for IronRuby’s image in the wider Ruby
community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about
weather it can run Rails or not).
+1.
While it seems logical to go down the path jimmy mentioned, It looks
like what will happen is that rails3 won’t run on IronRuby at all until
the 1.x releases build up 1.9 compat to a decent enough point and
stabilize.
Is 1.9 compat a big deal? It seems like it would be a ton of work to
implement 1.9 compatibility in a stable way - thereby leaving IronRuby
unable to run rails 3 for a long long time…
What’s the story on the other implementations for Rails 3? In other
words, will JRuby, Rubinius, et. al. run Rails 3 out of the gate? If so,
are
they doing it on a 1.9 compat version or 1.8.7? If they are pursuing the
former, no one will be able to fault IronRuby for not supporting Rails.
If
the latter, well, that’s your decision.
I’m not hard up for running Rails 3 on IronRuby. People are running
Rails
apps on *nix boxes now. A few more months isn’t going to hurt them.
Also,
while deploying Rails more easily on Windows is a selling point for
IronRuby, I think most will likely be on Rails 2.3.5 or previous for
some
time to come until they get up to speed with Rails 3. We have time.
I really don’t see Rails, in general, as a primary reason for using
IronRuby. There are a number of other libraries (some running on 1.9)
that
would be more likely candidates for driving IronRuby adoption. Stopping
the
presses just to get Rails 3 running when that doesn’t drive 1.9 forward
seems a bit short-sighted.
In other words, I like the current plan.
Ryan R.
Email: [email protected]
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley
Blog: http://wizardsofsmart.net/
Twitter: @panesofglass
Website: http://panesofglass.org/
JRuby, Rubinius and MacRuby will support Rails 3, but all three of them
are either working on a version to support 1.9 (Jruby), or only
targeting 1.9 (the other 2).
We’ve said a few times in the halls that if we had noticed the timing a
year ago, 1.9 would probably have been a better 1.0 target, but at this
point, changing directions makes no sense. We can focus on Rails 3 among
other priorities after 1.0. To ship is to choose ☺
JD
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ryan R.
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 2:30 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility
What’s the story on the other implementations for Rails 3? In other
words, will JRuby, Rubinius, et. al. run Rails 3 out of the gate? If so,
are they doing it on a 1.9 compat version or 1.8.7? If they are pursuing
the former, no one will be able to fault IronRuby for not supporting
Rails. If the latter, well, that’s your decision.
I’m not hard up for running Rails 3 on IronRuby. People are running
Rails apps on *nix boxes now. A few more months isn’t going to hurt
them. Also, while deploying Rails more easily on Windows is a selling
point for IronRuby, I think most will likely be on Rails 2.3.5 or
previous for some time to come until they get up to speed with Rails 3.
We have time.
I really don’t see Rails, in general, as a primary reason for using
IronRuby. There are a number of other libraries (some running on 1.9)
that would be more likely candidates for driving IronRuby adoption.
Stopping the presses just to get Rails 3 running when that doesn’t drive
1.9 forward seems a bit short-sighted.
In other words, I like the current plan.
Ryan R.
Email: [email protected]mailto:[email protected]
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/ryanriley
Blog: http://wizardsofsmart.net/
Twitter: @panesofglass
Website: http://panesofglass.org/
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Jim D.
<[email protected]mailto:[email protected]> wrote:
DISCLAIMER: We haven’t discussed this yet, I’m just tossing it out to
get thoughts.
One option may be to put Rails 3 compat as the focus for 1.1, so that
we do 1.0 in a few months on our current timeline, then put the focus
into implementing the needed things for Rails 3. After that we can
continue onto 1.9 support.
Thoughts?
JD
From:
[email protected]mailto:[email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]mailto:[email protected]]
On Behalf Of Orion E.
Sent: Monday, February 15, 2010 1:51 PM
To: [email protected]mailto:[email protected]
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility
IronRuby 1.0.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.8.6 compatible
IronRuby 1.x releases: ONLY ruby-1.9 compatible
My fear is that releasing 1.0 so close to release of Rails 3 without the
ability to run it will do little for IronRuby’s image in the wider Ruby
community (who, from my admittedly limited experience, care about
weather it can run Rails or not).
+1.
While it seems logical to go down the path jimmy mentioned, It looks
like what will happen is that rails3 won’t run on IronRuby at all until
the 1.x releases build up 1.9 compat to a decent enough point and
stabilize.
Is 1.9 compat a big deal? It seems like it would be a ton of work to
implement 1.9 compatibility in a stable way - thereby leaving IronRuby
unable to run rails 3 for a long long time…
Ironruby-core mailing list
[email protected]mailto:[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
Overreact? I never do that
If you guys are close to shipping 1.0, then I don’t have a problem with
a
newer patch level release, like 1.0.1 or 1.0.2, providing just enough
1.8.7
compat to support Rails 3. On the other hand, if you think that 1.9
support
is attainable this year, I’d rather see the team focus on that.
–
Will G.
http://hotgazpacho.org/
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 5:22 PM, Jimmy S. <
This forum is not affiliated to the Ruby language, Ruby on Rails framework, nor any Ruby applications discussed here.
Sponsor our Newsletter | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Remote Ruby Jobs