From owner-freebsd-ruby@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 8 22:57:47 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7ABD88F; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 22:57:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lb0-x235.google.com (mail-lb0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FB16C8; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 22:57:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lb0-f181.google.com with SMTP id z11so4313949lbi.26 for ; Mon, 08 Sep 2014 15:57:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=4yZolVDI1KD/a+T7KXB5lH6JDiqw1L1RBqsfD/zusTU=; b=UXGXu9wmf0hQ5AFeQqOfe5vAFp9ovmH9qQnci0shXyhhGCmQQCzggetdY5GHK91myt jybhuG+iAbJYH6R0zI0d85dCnJHmLMM2YoS/bUEHxKYgq286wxeBOEREMnkRyRRc6jX0 umnSDkVYJpVywnPbSBlXT7pUGDjZqCcRKovcfT5aui43SRiO+hJQ1TUaCM8TPVUYYLT1 foijxcAbXEkIYPq+NSNexv9XLeeXobvwAHREFwxCLtoWLZumpkheCGshFG3pZrRb/0cl iCW3MQjg3aA3SH0RqKp2P7O8v/3bv0mRS7bxtI9ttIQOYTIk3QVY0VTVHe80plgo9SAV 7kbA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.153.5.38 with SMTP id cj6mr32137884lad.34.1410215745485; Mon, 08 Sep 2014 15:35:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.25.36.70 with HTTP; Mon, 8 Sep 2014 15:35:45 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140908202221.GF67217@mouf.net> References: <20140906193632.GC67217@mouf.net> <20140908202221.GF67217@mouf.net> Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2014 15:35:45 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Ruby 2.0 From: Patrick Gibson To: Steve Wills Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18-1 Cc: freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD-specific Ruby discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Sep 2014 22:57:47 -0000 On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 1:22 PM, Steve Wills wrote: > On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 07:36:35PM +0000, Steve Wills wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 10:04:18AM -0700, Patrick wrote: > > > Are there any plans to make Ruby 2.0 (or even 2.1) the default Ruby > version > > > for FreeBSD? Most every Ruby developer and company I know has moved > past > > > 1.9, and the 1.9 default in FreeBSD makes it impossible to use the > official > > > pkg sources because any pkg upgrade action wants to replace ruby20 with > > > ruby19. While it's probably best that each of us uses our own pkg > > > repository built with something like Poudriere, it's definitely not > very > > > convenient given how much work is involved in setting everything up > that's > > > needed to provided a pkg source. > > > > > > Going from 1.9 to 2.0 is a pretty painless update. > > > > Yes, it's something that I've been looking at. Exp-run build tests have > been > > done several times and I've been using 2.0 as default for packages I > build for > > myself for a while, so it's really all ready to go. > > > > There is one issue, which is the version of devel/ruby-gems. I've been > told by > > ruby gems developers that using gem 1.8.x with ruby 2.0 isn't really > supported > > or "sane", though I forget the details at this point. So I wanted to get > that > > updated before switching the default. Maybe we should just do it without > that, > > since I don't know of any specific issues or have details on potential > issues. > > > > Thoughts? > > The exp-run for making 2.0 default was done again, and only 2 issues came > up > and I fixed both of those. Further I haven't been able to find any issues > with > the current version of gem in ports, though that doesn't mean they don't > exist > of course. > > So, I'm thinking we should go ahead and set a date and do it. Anyone have > objections to doing it October 9, 2014? Or is a month too long to wait? > > Steve > My reasons are perhaps selfish, but I'd say the sooner, the better. :) I've been using lang/ruby20 for quite some time without any issues (save for pkg-ng wanting to downgrade to ruby19 all of the time). That said, October 9, 2014 isn't that far away, and it's not going to have a huge impact either way.