Hi Ivan,
here are same thoghts from me:
To integrate IronRubyMvc into Umbraco CMS a configuration file (e.g.
ironrubymvc.config) would be fine. In Umbraco is a subfolder “/config”
used for such settings files. Usual way for additional modules is a
reference from web.config to the location of this config file. For
example with module UrlRewriting.Net it goes from web.config:
Native access to config settings from IronRuby via MVC_ENV would be fine
too.
Force one class per SomeController.rb and must contain SomeController
class sounds ok. But don’t know what’s the case with Helpers, no
experience from my side 
Current naming conventions SomeController.rb or some_controller.rb are
fine for me, may be via a setting in config? Also a setting for view
file name extentions (current “.html.erb”)?
Immo
Ivan Porto carrero wrote:
How do you want to provide different development environments for
ironrubymvc ?
I can either do it by creating the configuration section I’ve been
planning,
this would be used to provide load paths for example for libraries
outside
of the web project.I can have a parameter there something like MvcEnv which will set the
ruby
constant MVC_ENVbased on the value of that constant it would then be possible to provide
different behavior for the require statement, much like rails does.Would it be a good idea to enforce a single class per file for
controllers
and helpers, or would it be better to leave that up to the judgment of
the
user of the framework?Should there be validation for naming conventions. like a file
home_controller.rb has to define the HomeController class?
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)