# RubyGems/RDoc 1.8.6 policy

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rubygems-rdoc-1-8-6-policy/187509>\
**Category:** IronRuby\
**Created:** [April 24, 2010, 10:41am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rubygems-rdoc-1-8-6-policy/187509 "2010-04-24T10:41:24Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 6\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Zac\_Brown](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/z/7c8e57/32.png) [@Zac\_Brown](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Zac_Brown)\
**Post date:** [April 24, 2010, 10:41am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rubygems-rdoc-1-8-6-policy/187509/1 "2010-04-24T10:41:24Z")

</div>

Saw this earlier today, might be something to think about in the near  
future for IronRuby and compatibility.

[http://blog.segment7.net/articles/2010/04/23/ruby-1-8-6-policy](http://blog.segment7.net/articles/2010/04/23/ruby-1-8-6-policy)

-Zac

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Zac\_Brown](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/z/7c8e57/32.png) [@Zac\_Brown](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Zac_Brown)\
**Post date:** [April 24, 2010, 10:03pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rubygems-rdoc-1-8-6-policy/187509/2 "2010-04-24T22:03:16Z")

</div>

Looks like we’ll need an IronRuby 1.0.1 that brings us up to 1.8.7.  
Unless  
we can get to 1.9 faster…

–  
Will G.  
[http://hotgazpacho.org/](http://hotgazpacho.org/)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Zac\_Brown](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/z/7c8e57/32.png) [@Zac\_Brown](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Zac_Brown)\
**Post date:** [April 24, 2010, 10:31pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rubygems-rdoc-1-8-6-policy/187509/3 "2010-04-24T22:31:56Z")

</div>

Yup, thats what it appears. I’m willing to work on either, just depends  
on what people’s needs are. I personally would be prefer just pushing  
forward with 1.9 support but I don’t know the state of 1.9 vs 1.8.7  
support.

-Zac

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Zac\_Brown](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/z/7c8e57/32.png) [@Zac\_Brown](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Zac_Brown)\
**Post date:** [April 24, 2010, 10:44pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rubygems-rdoc-1-8-6-policy/187509/4 "2010-04-24T22:44:14Z")

</div>

Are there any particular 1.8.7 features you know that don’t work in  
IronRuby 1.0? Note that you can pass -1.8.7 command line argument to  
ir.exe, which enabels some 1.8.7 features.

Tomas

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Zac\_Brown](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/z/7c8e57/32.png) [@Zac\_Brown](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Zac_Brown)\
**Post date:** [April 24, 2010, 10:50pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rubygems-rdoc-1-8-6-policy/187509/5 "2010-04-24T22:50:40Z")

</div>

To be honest, no. I went straight from 1.8.6 to 1.9. I never actually  
tried to use 1.8.7 so I’m not aware of its differences from 1.8.6 and  
1.9.

-Zac

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Zac\_Brown](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/z/7c8e57/32.png) [@Zac\_Brown](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/Zac_Brown)\
**Post date:** [April 26, 2010, 5:56pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/rubygems-rdoc-1-8-6-policy/187509/6 "2010-04-26T17:56:32Z")

</div>

I don’t know how complete we are in respect to 1.8.7, but I don’t think  
we should focus on it unless there is considerable requests for it.  
Between this Rubygems announcement and Rails, I would expect we’ll start  
seeing a stronger move to 1.9 in the next year.

JD