pkgsrc-Users archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: Spring clean up for Ruby on Rails.

Takahiro Kambe <> writes:

> Currently, there are three versions of Ruby on Rails on pkgsrc.
> But it cost to maintain, especially for binary packages.
> And for now, most of packages can be built with Ruby on Rails 3.2
> based packages.  So, I'll remove 3.0 and 3.1 support from pkgsrc before
> pkgsrc-2012Q2, as soon as possible it could be.  (Anyway, I have more
> than 60 packages could be commitable for currnet Ruby packages before
> to do so.)

I don't understand ruby culture well enough to know.  But if it sounds
like anything anyone would want to run would run on 3.2, then removing
the older ones seems sensible.  If you dropped 3.0, how many packages
would be lost?  What about 3.0 and also 3.1?

One thing to keep in mind is that pkgsrc bits are often used to run bits
not from pkgsrc.  So "all rails pkgs in pkgsrc are ok with 3.2" does not
imply "having 3.1 is pointless".

Do most ruby/rails people mock 3.1 as hopelessly old?  It seems 3.2 has
been out a year, so I'd guess yes.

I don't mean to give an answer - just explaining how I think about this
'should we remove x' question.

Attachment: pgpZpFgUn6qVb.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index