| 1 |
On Sun, 2016-12-04 at 00:21 -0800, Daniel Campbell wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> 1. Do users need to know about MRI? I had to search the Web to figure |
| 4 |
> out that it's referring to Matz's Ruby Interpreter (or CRuby), which |
| 5 |
> is |
| 6 |
> the reference implementation. This information (if important) may be |
| 7 |
> useful to include, like "Ruby MRI (Matz's Ruby Interpreter) 2.1 ...". |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
It is perhaps not so useful anymore since we no longer have other ruby |
| 10 |
implementations, like jruby, in the tree. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> Ruby MRI (Matz's Ruby Interpreter) 2.0 was retired by upstream in |
| 13 |
> February 2016. [1] Following this, Ruby MRI 2.0 support will be |
| 14 |
> removed |
| 15 |
> from Gentoo in favor of Ruby MRI 2.1. We recommend updating to the |
| 16 |
> 'ruby21' target as soon as possible. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Thanks, I've used this, but left the "in favor of" part out since |
| 19 |
ruby21 is already default (with ruby20) in the profiles for some time. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> I felt that the base profile variable mention and the bit about MRI |
| 22 |
> being the best interpreter were better left out, but it also doesn't |
| 23 |
> actively hurt it. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Yes, I guess this is common knowledge now. I used the ruby19 news items |
| 26 |
as a template, but that was 1.5 years ago. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Hans |
Archives