Thanks for all the feedback on what you guys are interested in.
I would like to request folks to start playing with IronRuby and Rails
2.3.5 today. Mark, trying IronRuby + Rails on Azure sounds like a great
project. It would be great if you could look at using Rails 2.3.5 for
now. Having such a demo for IronRuby V1 RTM will be a great showcasing
of the exiting functionality. I understand that Rails 3 is of interest
to folks, and that support will come. But there will always be something
new around the corner and we are chasing a moving target in that
regards.
Getting you folks to play with what works today will be greatly
appreciated. Do report the blocking issues you run into. Most of those
will apply to getting Rails 3 working as well anyway.
Shri
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mark Rendle
Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2010 7:06 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] MRI 1.8.7 compatibility
MRI 1.9.1 is my Linux Ruby of choice, so I’m definitely in favour of 1.9
being the focus for IronRuby, and as soon as I can clone a 1.x branch
I’ll be all over it, with Rails 3 testing as a focus. (Eventual aim: to
prove IronRuby & Rails 3 as a cool Windows Azure solution).
Mark
On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 10:22 PM, Jimmy S.
<[email protected]mailto:[email protected]>
wrote:
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]
[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…
