From: Bill Guindon Date: 2006-05-24T07:19:41+09:00 Subject: Re: Proposing: A new Ruby Windows installer On 5/23/06, Enterprise Astronaut wrote: > Curt Hibbs wrote: > > installer team. I have been asking for help repeatedly over the years > > without much response. So far, only Ryan Leavengood and Shashank Date > > have > > helped. > > Well, maybe this is the real problem with the Ruby community then? > Asking for assistance over a number of years to get help on an installer > package that I'm sure thousands of people, companies, etc. use daily and > coming back with mostly deaf echos is not ideal. I think the problem is far more one of the 'Windows users community'. Not many windows users know how to compile files, or have experience with building an installer. Add to that, having the time, ability, willingness to help, etc, and the group keeps getting smaller. I do agree that it would be nice if more people helped, and I'm sure as more windows users start using Ruby, more people (with the required skills) will help. Personally, I'll look into NSIS, and see how much I can learn about it, but even if I can pick it up, it's more of a time crunch issue for me these days. Then there's the fact that I don't _need_ the most recent release, and since I'm not paying Curt, Ryan, or Shashank to produce one, I'm fine with waiting for it. > This installer is a > fundamental piece of Ruby being accepted by a larger audience (sorry but > Windows is still the dominant platform out there). I know a lot of > developers/companies that unless they get a timely pretty installer > package they won't bother using it or allow it on a server. (I hear the > argument already "well we don't want those types of developers > anyway"... Don't we? Do we want critical mass or be a niche language?) Indeed, it is accepted by a large audience. Probably because it works well, and is updated frequently enough for most of us. This is at least the third time in about a week that somebody has presumed that 'we want critical mass' (or 'enterprise', or whatever). Well, I can't speak for 'we', but I don't particularly care how many people use Ruby, I just care that it exists, and I get to use it. Ruby was much more of a niche language when I first started using it (pre Rails), and even then, it was getting enough care and attention for me. Since then, it's usage has grown just fine on it's own. > The point of my post was to eliminate the manual work that has to go > into a Ruby installer. Make it a lot more automated, flick a switch and > walk away. Excellent idea. Build it, and set it up on a server for us. If you can't host it, I'm sure others will volunteer. > Even under ideal situations the Ruby Windows Installer is at > least a few days/weeks turn around time. Right now the 1.84 release is > going on 6 months. This is the reality right now. On 5/23/06, Curt Hibbs wrote: "The lag this time around is an anomaly." and... "With the new build system it should be possible to reduce that lag time to a few days." > The release of a > Ruby installer should not be based on someone's agenda, it should be an > automated process. I appreciate what the team does and the endless work > they put into it but at some point the Ruby community will need to > mature in this regard. > > From a company's perspective I have a lot better chance of having this > installed on a server based simply off of the organized, tidy webpage: > http://www.python.org/download/releases/2.4.3/ > All the releases synced up, all the builds ready for download from one > location. Nice and easy. When I look at the Ruby download site I see a > mis-mash of info and links leading off to other sites- it looks > unprofessional at best. Again, I'm looking at this from a company's > eyes. First impressions mean a lot. Ok, so the logical choices are... Make a better build system, or at least spec one out, and see if you can get others to build it for you. Hire others to make a better build system. Offer to sponsor it (ala Google's Summer of Code). Deal with the current build system, and use Ruby until others get the chance to improve it. Walk away, and use Python until the build system is improved. I think that's about it. Telling the people (who are doing all of this for free) that they are 'doing it wrong' really doesn't do much to solve the problem. > -The Enterprise Astronaut > > -- > Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/. > > -- Bill Guindon (aka aGorilla) The best answer to most questions is "it depends".