I've been wondering which version of Rails we should try to put into EPEL6. Right now, obviously, Rails 2.3.x is pretty popular, however, in looking forward at a 7 year life-cycle, it seems like Rails 3 might be a good idea. My fear however, is that even the next version of Rails 3 will have abi/api breakage, so it will be very difficult to move.
Thoughts?
stahnma
On 12/10/10 - 01:46:31PM, Michael Stahnke wrote:
I've been wondering which version of Rails we should try to put into EPEL6. Right now, obviously, Rails 2.3.x is pretty popular, however, in looking forward at a 7 year life-cycle, it seems like Rails 3 might be a good idea. My fear however, is that even the next version of Rails 3 will have abi/api breakage, so it will be very difficult to move.
As an FYI, I think there was some talk about putting Rails 3 into Fedora 15 as well. I would think that we would go with Rails 3 for both, if possible, though we'd want to check out how many packages already in Fedora might break if we do that.
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Chris Lalancette clalance@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/10/10 - 01:46:31PM, Michael Stahnke wrote:
I've been wondering which version of Rails we should try to put into EPEL6. Right now, obviously, Rails 2.3.x is pretty popular, however, in looking forward at a 7 year life-cycle, it seems like Rails 3 might be a good idea. My fear however, is that even the next version of Rails 3 will have abi/api breakage, so it will be very difficult to move.
As an FYI, I think there was some talk about putting Rails 3 into Fedora 15 as well. I would think that we would go with Rails 3 for both, if possible, though we'd want to check out how many packages already in Fedora might break if we do that.
+1 for Rails 3 on EPEL
Rails community tends to catch up with new Rails versions pretty quickly and quite often even run on Edge. So I think it's quite logical to assume that Rails 3 would catch up soon. I'm pretty sure Rails 3 will come to pass before 7 years, but for the same reason 2.3.x could be outdated long long before that. So 3.x, IMO.
It'd be nice if Fedora 15 also decides on Rails 3 with Ruby 1.9.2 (and also have a RVM setup for those who want to use).
-- Chris Lalancette _______________________________________________ ruby-sig mailing list ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig
On 12/11/10 - 08:56:54AM, Gaveen Prabhasara wrote:
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Chris Lalancette clalance@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/10/10 - 01:46:31PM, Michael Stahnke wrote:
I've been wondering which version of Rails we should try to put into EPEL6. Right now, obviously, Rails 2.3.x is pretty popular, however, in looking forward at a 7 year life-cycle, it seems like Rails 3 might be a good idea. My fear however, is that even the next version of Rails 3 will have abi/api breakage, so it will be very difficult to move.
As an FYI, I think there was some talk about putting Rails 3 into Fedora 15 as well. I would think that we would go with Rails 3 for both, if possible, though we'd want to check out how many packages already in Fedora might break if we do that.
+1 for Rails 3 on EPEL
Rails community tends to catch up with new Rails versions pretty quickly and quite often even run on Edge. So I think it's quite logical to assume that Rails 3 would catch up soon. I'm pretty sure Rails 3 will come to pass before 7 years, but for the same reason 2.3.x could be outdated long long before that. So 3.x, IMO.
It'd be nice if Fedora 15 also decides on Rails 3 with Ruby 1.9.2 (and also have a RVM setup for those who want to use).
I'm not sure about Ruby 1.9. I think the current plan is to stick with 1.8.7 for Fedora 15. As I understand it, 1.9 has the potential to break extension modules, so we should definitely tread lightly there. I would like a lot more data on what packages are compatible with 1.9 before we go that route.
Having RVM is a no-brainer; it is already in Fedora :).
Dne 13.12.2010 14:56, Chris Lalancette napsal(a):
On 12/11/10 - 08:56:54AM, Gaveen Prabhasara wrote:
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Chris Lalancetteclalance@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/10/10 - 01:46:31PM, Michael Stahnke wrote:
I've been wondering which version of Rails we should try to put into EPEL6. Right now, obviously, Rails 2.3.x is pretty popular, however, in looking forward at a 7 year life-cycle, it seems like Rails 3 might be a good idea. My fear however, is that even the next version of Rails 3 will have abi/api breakage, so it will be very difficult to move.
As an FYI, I think there was some talk about putting Rails 3 into Fedora 15 as well. I would think that we would go with Rails 3 for both, if possible, though we'd want to check out how many packages already in Fedora might break if we do that.
+1 for Rails 3 on EPEL
Rails community tends to catch up with new Rails versions pretty quickly and quite often even run on Edge. So I think it's quite logical to assume that Rails 3 would catch up soon. I'm pretty sure Rails 3 will come to pass before 7 years, but for the same reason 2.3.x could be outdated long long before that. So 3.x, IMO.
It'd be nice if Fedora 15 also decides on Rails 3 with Ruby 1.9.2 (and also have a RVM setup for those who want to use).
I'm not sure about Ruby 1.9. I think the current plan is to stick with 1.8.7 for Fedora 15. As I understand it, 1.9 has the potential to break extension modules, so we should definitely tread lightly there. I would like a lot more data on what packages are compatible with 1.9 before we go that route.
Having RVM is a no-brainer; it is already in Fedora :).
Hello, I'd like to point out that http://isitruby19.com/ already contains list of Ruby 1.9 in/compatible gems.
Vit
On 12/13/10 - 03:29:41PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
It'd be nice if Fedora 15 also decides on Rails 3 with Ruby 1.9.2 (and also have a RVM setup for those who want to use).
I'm not sure about Ruby 1.9. I think the current plan is to stick with 1.8.7 for Fedora 15. As I understand it, 1.9 has the potential to break extension modules, so we should definitely tread lightly there. I would like a lot more data on what packages are compatible with 1.9 before we go that route.
Having RVM is a no-brainer; it is already in Fedora :).
Hello, I'd like to point out that http://isitruby19.com/ already contains list of Ruby 1.9 in/compatible gems.
Good resource. The next step is to find out what ruby packages in Fedora are 1.9 compatible, and which ones need to be upgraded.
On 12/13/2010 08:56 AM, Chris Lalancette wrote:
On 12/11/10 - 08:56:54AM, Gaveen Prabhasara wrote:
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 1:24 AM, Chris Lalancetteclalance@redhat.com wrote:
On 12/10/10 - 01:46:31PM, Michael Stahnke wrote:
I've been wondering which version of Rails we should try to put into EPEL6. Right now, obviously, Rails 2.3.x is pretty popular, however, in looking forward at a 7 year life-cycle, it seems like Rails 3 might be a good idea. My fear however, is that even the next version of Rails 3 will have abi/api breakage, so it will be very difficult to move.
As an FYI, I think there was some talk about putting Rails 3 into Fedora 15 as well. I would think that we would go with Rails 3 for both, if possible, though we'd want to check out how many packages already in Fedora might break if we do that.
+1 for Rails 3 on EPEL
Rails community tends to catch up with new Rails versions pretty quickly and quite often even run on Edge. So I think it's quite logical to assume that Rails 3 would catch up soon. I'm pretty sure Rails 3 will come to pass before 7 years, but for the same reason 2.3.x could be outdated long long before that. So 3.x, IMO.
It'd be nice if Fedora 15 also decides on Rails 3 with Ruby 1.9.2 (and also have a RVM setup for those who want to use).
I'm not sure about Ruby 1.9. I think the current plan is to stick with 1.8.7 for Fedora 15. As I understand it, 1.9 has the potential to break extension modules, so we should definitely tread lightly there. I would like a lot more data on what packages are compatible with 1.9 before we go that route.
Having RVM is a no-brainer; it is already in Fedora :).
Also +1 to rails 3.0.x in Fedora 15 and RHEL 6. I think this is the consensus of most people in the Fedora/Ruby community as well as internally at RH.
As far as ruby 1.9 there is already alot of work done to support a rpm which can be installed in parallel w/ the Ruby 1.8.7 one. There is more work TBD but IMO nothing that can't be done by F15.
-Mo
ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Chris Lalancette -
Gaveen Prabhasara -
Michael Stahnke -
Mo Morsi -
Vít Ondruch