From: "Vít Ondruch" <v.ondruch@...>
Date: 2011-08-11T04:13:20+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:38906] Re: Why Ruby has versioned paths?

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------090508040007070408010704
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Dne 10.8.2011 14:40, Michael Klishin napsal(a):
> 2011/8/10 V��t Ondruch <v.ondruch@gmail.com <mailto:v.ondruch@gmail.com>>
>
>     And what is the reason in real life to have two versions of Ruby
>     on your computer, since the first think which will conflict is the
>     Ruby executable, the second are manual pages, etc ...
>
>
> To work on different applications, both old (and thus using 1.8.7) and 
> new (typically started on 1.9.2 these days). To make sure your 
> libraries work on multiple Ruby versions. To provide multiple Ruby 
> versions in case of hoster/cloud providers. To let people run CI 
> against multiple Ruby versions like travis-ci.org <http://travis-ci.org>.
>
> Conflicts with Ruby executable are solved by version prefixes or tools 
> like RVM. RVM solves plenty of other issues like isolated gem sets.
>
> Every person I know who has released at least one gem has more than 
> one Ruby installed and often uses RVM for that.
> -- 
> MK
>
> http://github.com/michaelklishin
> http://twitter.com/michaelklishin
>

But for every case you have mentioned, I would prefer to install into 
location with different prefix, e.g. /opt/ruby18 and /opt/ruby19 so the 
version numbers are useless. So again, I am wondering if somebody mixes 
Ruby 1.8 and Ruby 1.9 into one folder in reality, not if that is 
possible in theory.


And exactly tools like RVM leads me to questioning the rationale behind 
version numbers in paths.


Vit

--------------090508040007070408010704
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    Dne 10.8.2011 14:40, Michael Klishin napsal(a):
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAE3HoVSqxJ+QC_8saeutvERFp9z-bwp+N4kguc2mYHt9_p8pxg@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">2011/8/10 V��t Ondruch <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a
          moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:v.ondruch@gmail.com">v.ondruch@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span><br>
      <div class="gmail_quote">
        <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
          .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
          And what is the reason in real life to have two versions of
          Ruby on your computer, since the first think which will
          conflict is the Ruby executable, the second are manual pages,
          etc ...</blockquote>
      </div>
      <br>
      To work on different applications, both old (and thus using 1.8.7)
      and new (typically started on 1.9.2 these days). To make sure your
      libraries work on multiple Ruby versions. To provide multiple Ruby
      versions in case of hoster/cloud providers. To let people run CI
      against multiple Ruby versions like <a moz-do-not-send="true"
        href="http://travis-ci.org">travis-ci.org</a>.<br clear="all">
      <br>
      Conflicts with Ruby executable are solved by version prefixes or
      tools like RVM. RVM solves plenty of other issues like isolated
      gem sets.<br>
      <br>
      Every person I know who has released at least one gem has more
      than one Ruby installed and often uses RVM for that.<br>
      -- <br>
      MK<br>
      <br>
      <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://github.com/michaelklishin"
        target="_blank">http://github.com/michaelklishin</a><br>
      <a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://twitter.com/michaelklishin"
        target="_blank">http://twitter.com/michaelklishin</a><br>
      <br>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    But for every case you have mentioned, I would prefer to install
    into location with different prefix, e.g. /opt/ruby18 and
    /opt/ruby19 so the version numbers are useless. So again, I am
    wondering if somebody mixes Ruby 1.8 and Ruby 1.9 into one folder in
    reality, not if that is possible in theory.<br>
    <br>
    <br>
    And exactly tools like RVM leads me to questioning the rationale
    behind version numbers in paths.<br>
    <br>
    <br>
    Vit
  </body>
</html>

--------------090508040007070408010704--