Re: Ruby in squeeze
On 20/12/09 at 18:31 -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum dijo [Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 09:49:51AM +0100]:
> > Proposed actions:
> > - All packages currently build-depending or depending on Ruby 1.9.0 must
> > switch to Ruby 1.9.1 or completely drop the dependency on Ruby 1.9.*.
> > - ruby1.9 (providing Ruby 1.9.0) must be removed from Debian.
>
> We should try to ensure we are ready to switch to defaulting to 1.9.x
> anyway - By making sure all of our modules provide 1.8 and 1.9
> versions.
Erm. Having our modules provide 1.8 and 1.9 versions requires having a
way to easily package two versions. I don't think there's enough
manpower to do that before squeeze. I would prefer if we stayed with the
statu quo: maintainers are free to provide 1.9(.1) versions of their
modules if they want to, but there's no obligation to.
> > Does someone know something about the Ruby 1.9.2 plans? I've read they
> > have been delayed, but I don't know the new plans. Should we try to
> > release squeeze with 1.9.2 instead of 1.9.1?
>
> I'll just point the same way others have on this same thread: If it is
> released in the due period, we should strive to support it and have
> the maximum possible number of modules ready for it. Otherwise, we
> should just stick to 1.9.1.
OK. We are now close to the end of the year. There's a new version of
Ruby 1.8, which I think we want to package for squeeze, but no new
version of 1.9.{1,2}. So I think that the only sensible thing to do is:
- package 1.8.7.248
- stay with 1.9.1, possibly updating to a later snapshot if one is
released.
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
Reply to: