# Re: Regarding IronRuby... How true it sounds from this blog

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-regarding-ironruby-how-true-it-sounds-from-this-blog/136126>\
**Category:** IronRuby\
**Created:** [April 29, 2008, 6:36am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-regarding-ironruby-how-true-it-sounds-from-this-blog/136126 "2008-04-29T06:36:05Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ryan](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/r/a8b319/32.png) [@ryan](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ryan)\
**Post date:** [April 29, 2008, 6:36am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-regarding-ironruby-how-true-it-sounds-from-this-blog/136126/1 "2008-04-29T06:36:05Z")

</div>

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 08:50:48 -0600, M. David P. \<  
removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid\> wrote:

> So while Charlie is correct: The IronRuby  
> project needs to become more community oriented, that community  
> orientation needs to come from not only MSFT’s direction, but the  
> communities direction as well.

Very well stated. And Wayne’s list certainly helps in giving a better  
understanding of what is left. Such a status sent weekly (at a minimum)  
could certainly help keep everyone up-to-date. Also, nothing prevents  
anyone  
from starting their own git or mercurial branch. If the community wants  
to  
actively work by that method, by all means we should. That could  
potentially  
even help with the community aspect. The only thing holding anyone back  
is a  
desire to stay completely on the same page (a la subversion and  
rubyforge).  
Better and more frequent communication would better serve the community  
in  
this case.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![ryan](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/r/a8b319/32.png) [@ryan](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/ryan)\
**Post date:** [April 29, 2008, 3:12pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-regarding-ironruby-how-true-it-sounds-from-this-blog/136126/2 "2008-04-29T15:12:11Z")

</div>

The problem with trying to branch IronRuby like that is the DLR is  
likely to change from underneath it. Not that the idea hasn’t  
occurred to me before, but it’s really not a viable option in this  
scenario.

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 12:34 AM, Ryan R.  
[removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote:

> could certainly help keep everyone up-to-date. Also, nothing prevents anyone  
> [http://www.panesofglass.org/](http://www.panesofglass.org/)
> 
> * * *
> 
> Ironruby-core mailing list  
> removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid  
> [http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core](http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core)

–  
Michael L.  
[Polymath Prokrammer]  
[http://blog.prokrams.com](http://blog.prokrams.com)