# What version of Ruby does/will Rails 3 require? **URL:** \ **Category:** Rails\ **Created:** [May 4, 2010, 6:32am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/what-version-of-ruby-does-will-rails-3-require/188015 "2010-05-04T06:32:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![matthew](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/ed655f/32.png) [@matthew](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/matthew)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2010, 6:32am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/what-version-of-ruby-does-will-rails-3-require/188015/1 "2010-05-04T06:32:20Z")
What version of Ruby does or will Rails 3 require? ---
**Author:** ![matthew](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/ed655f/32.png) [@matthew](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/matthew)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2010, 6:44am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/what-version-of-ruby-does-will-rails-3-require/188015/2 "2010-05-04T06:44:18Z")
Sent from my iPhone On May 3, 2010, at 9:32 PM, Matt S. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > What version of Ruby does or will Rails 3 require? Matt, Rails 3 requires Ruby 1.8.7 at the absolute minimum but works best with Ruby 1.9.2. Good luck, -Conrad ---
**Author:** ![matthew](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/ed655f/32.png) [@matthew](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/matthew)\ **Post date:** [May 4, 2010, 5:01pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/what-version-of-ruby-does-will-rails-3-require/188015/3 "2010-05-04T17:01:15Z")
I don’t think Ruby 1.9 is ready for production. Neither do @wycats [http://twitter.com/wycats/status/13314233693](http://twitter.com/wycats/status/13314233693) And, I guess, making a project on Rails 3 is risky too. Too many bugs for now ---
**Author:** ![matthew](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/ed655f/32.png) [@matthew](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/matthew)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2010, 7:15pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/what-version-of-ruby-does-will-rails-3-require/188015/4 "2010-05-05T19:15:54Z")
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 5:16 AM, Marnen Laibow-Koser [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid)wrote: > Marnen, I have also been using 1.9.1 for over a year and the Rails core team recommends Ruby 1.9.2. Thus, I have recently started using Ruby 1.9.2 with Rails 2.3.5 on a new project for the last 2 months. I must say that things look very very good. Also, this will make it much easier to migrate to Rails 3.0 when it’s ready and gem dependencies are met for the application. -Conrad ---
**Author:** ![matthew](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/ed655f/32.png) [@matthew](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/matthew)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2010, 2:16pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/what-version-of-ruby-does-will-rails-3-require/188015/5 "2010-05-05T14:16:01Z")
Vladimir R. wrote: > I don’t think Ruby 1.9 is ready for production. Neither do @wycats > [http://twitter.com/wycats/status/13314233693](http://twitter.com/wycats/status/13314233693) That tweet refers to 1.9.1, and implies that 1.9.2 is ready for production. I’d like to know what Yehuda meant, though. Lots of people have been using 1.9.1 for quite a while. > And, I guess, making a project on Rails 3 is risky too. Too many bugs > for > now Yeah. It _is_ prerelease software. ## Best, Marnen Laibow-Koser [http://www.marnen.org](http://www.marnen.org) removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid ---
**Author:** ![matthew](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/ed655f/32.png) [@matthew](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/matthew)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2010, 7:19pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/what-version-of-ruby-does-will-rails-3-require/188015/6 "2010-05-05T19:19:43Z")
Conrad T. wrote: > On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 5:16 AM, Marnen Laibow-Koser > [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid)wrote: > > > > > Marnen, I have also been using 1.9.1 for over a year and the Rails core > team recommends Ruby 1.9.2. Thus, I have recently started using Ruby > 1.9.2 with Rails 2.3.5 on a new project for the last 2 months. I must > say > that things look very very good. Also, this will make it much easier to > migrate to Rails 3.0 when it’s ready and gem dependencies are met for > the > application. Good to know! I’m still using 1.8, but the time to switch seems to be very close indeed. > -Conrad ## Best, Marnen Laibow-Koser [http://www.marnen.org](http://www.marnen.org) removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid ---
**Author:** ![matthew](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/ed655f/32.png) [@matthew](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/matthew)\ **Post date:** [May 5, 2010, 7:51pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/what-version-of-ruby-does-will-rails-3-require/188015/7 "2010-05-05T19:51:01Z")
On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 7:59 AM, Vladimir R. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid)wrote: > I don’t think Ruby 1.9 is ready for production. Neither do @wycats > [http://twitter.com/wycats/status/13314233693](http://twitter.com/wycats/status/13314233693) Vladimir, here’s the current schedule for Ruby 1.9.2 and this looks very promising: > **[Ruby 1.9.2 Release Schedule Aims at August for Final Release](https://www.infoq.com/news/2010/03/ruby-192-schedule/)** > > Now that Ruby 1.9.2 passes all RubySpec tests, a revised release schedule for Ruby 1.9.2 has been announced. It aims at mid-August for the final release. -Conrad