Thinking about it, lower-case “dotnet” sounds fine. Since we don’t know how the value will be used, its better to be conservative and follow existing naming patterns (lower case letters)
Any votes for “clr”? Else, I will change RbConfig::CONFIG[“arch”] to “universal-dotnet2.0” /“universal-dotnet4.0” From: ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org [mailto:ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Tomas Matousek Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 9:11 AM To: ironruby-core@rubyforge.org Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] IronRuby version of existing gems Wouldn’t “clr” be better after all? Tomas From: ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org [mailto:ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Will Green Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 8:47 AM To: ironruby-core@rubyforge.org Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] IronRuby version of existing gems Then why is RbConfig['arch'] "universal-.net2.0" and not "universal-.NET2.0"? -- Will Green http://hotgazpacho.org/ On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Shri Borde <shri.bo...@microsoft.com<mailto:shri.bo...@microsoft.com>> wrote: The name is spelled as “.NET”, and so "gemname-universal-dotNET" would read better than just "gemname-universal-dotnet". From: ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org> [mailto:ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org>] On Behalf Of Will Green Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 8:57 PM To: ironruby-core Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] IronRuby version of existing gems Attached is a new patch I would propose to address the feedback from the Ruby Gems team. I would love some feedback on it. It is a patch against rev 2463 of trunk of Ruby Gems source. -- Will Green http://hotgazpacho.org/ On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 10:33 PM, Will Green <w...@hotgazpacho.org<mailto:w...@hotgazpacho.org>> wrote: Based on some work that Shri and I did to figure this out, I have created and submitted a patch to Ruby Gems to include support form .Net native gems: http://rubyforge.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=27951&group_id=126&atid=577 As you can see, I've gotten some push-back from the Ruby Gems team on the naming of the platform for the gems. The problem is that they don't like the "." in ".net" (i.e. "universal-.net-2.0"), and have suggested alternatives such as "dotnet", "dotNet", and "Net". I have asked for clarification on their position. If I understand the Gem::Platform class correctly, the initialize method takes in the values read from RbConfig, and performs some translation to come up with a Gem platform name. So, without any changes to IronRuby itself, we could have gems with names like "iron-term-ansicolor-universal-dotnet". Of course, it would require a small tweak to the version of Ruby Gems that is distributed with IronRuby, but the change is very minor. So, does anyone object to .Net native gems like: "gemname-universal-dotnet" "gemname-universal-dotnet-2.0" "gemname-universal-dotnet-4.0" I think this would get the patch accepted more quickly. Is this kosher with LCA, or even something that needs to be brought to their attention? -- Will Green http://hotgazpacho.org/ On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Jim Deville <jdevi...@microsoft.com<mailto:jdevi...@microsoft.com>> wrote: I’m also wondering what will happen if you put the gem on two different gem servers (if that is possible, like github and rubyforge). Does gem attempt all sources to find the most specific? Or does it go with the most specific gem from the first source? JD From: ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org> [mailto:ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org>] On Behalf Of Shri Borde Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 6:53 PM To: ironruby-core@rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core@rubyforge.org> Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] IronRuby version of existing gems Will, could you recreate the universal-.net gem again and push it? I think it might have been created incorrectly. The persisted Gem::Specification has @new_platform and @original_platform set to “universal-unknown” which might happen if you create it with MRI as I had mentioned below… From: ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org> [mailto:ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org>] On Behalf Of Shri Borde Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 2:27 PM To: ironruby-core@rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core@rubyforge.org> Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] IronRuby version of existing gems My guess is that RubyGems tries to look for an exact platform match first. If there is no exact match, it somehow prefers “ruby” over other platforms. Btw, you could just change clr_version in Merlin\Main\Languages\Ruby\Libs\rbconfig.rb to “4.0” to simulate running on .NET 4. After doing this and using the “—platform universal-.net” option, iron-term-ansicolor-0.0.3-universal-.net-2.0 was installed which was surprising to me as I would have expected it to install iron-term-ansicolor-0.0.3-universal-.net. When I used the “—platform universal-.net-4.0” option, iron-term-ansicolor-0.0.3 was installed which was also surprising. So there does not seem to be any way to install iron-term-ansicolor-0.0.3-universal-.net. From: ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org> [mailto:ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org<mailto:ironruby-core-boun...@rubyforge.org>] On Behalf Of Will Green Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2010 6:33 AM To: ironruby-core Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] IronRuby version of existing gems Thanks, Daniele! I've got three version of iron-term-ansicolor out there on RubyGems.org: * iron-term-ansicolor-0.0.3 (gemspec.platform="ruby") * iron-term-ansicolor-0.0.3-universal-.net (gemspec.platform="universal-.net") * iron-term-ansicolor-0.0.3-universal-.net-2.0 (gemspec.platform="universal-.net-2.0") It looks like the .Net 4 runtime selected the non-platform specific gem, while the .Net 2 runtime selected the "universal-.net-2.0" gem. -- Will Green http://hotgazpacho.org/ On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 4:01 AM, Daniele Alessandri <suppaki...@gmail.com<mailto:suppaki...@gmail.com>> wrote: On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 08:07, Will Green <w...@hotgazpacho.org<mailto:w...@hotgazpacho.org>> wrote: > I would appreciate if someone running the latest from git would try > ir -S gem install iron-term-ansicolor > on both the .Net 2 and the .Net 4 runtimes, and let me know which gem gets > installed. C:\Users\nrk\Repositories\ironruby\Merlin\Main\bin\Debug>ir --version IronRuby 0.9.4.0 on .NET 2.0.50727.4200 C:\Users\nrk\Repositories\ironruby\Merlin\Main\bin\Debug>ir -S gem install iron-term-ansicolor --no-rdoc --no-ri Successfully installed iron-term-ansicolor-0.0.3-universal-.net-2.0 1 gem installed C:\Users\nrk\Repositories\ironruby\Merlin\Main\bin\Debug>ir --version IronRuby 0.9.4.0 on .NET 4.0.30128.1 C:\Users\nrk\Repositories\ironruby\Merlin\Main\bin\Debug>ir -S gem install iron-term-ansicolor --no-rdoc --no-ri Successfully installed iron-term-ansicolor-0.0.3 1 gem installed -- Daniele Alessandri http://www.clorophilla.net/ http://twitter.com/JoL1hAHN _______________________________________________ Ironruby-core mailing list Ironruby-core@rubyforge.org<mailto:Ironruby-core@rubyforge.org> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core _______________________________________________ Ironruby-core mailing list Ironruby-core@rubyforge.org<mailto:Ironruby-core@rubyforge.org> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core _______________________________________________ Ironruby-core mailing list Ironruby-core@rubyforge.org<mailto:Ironruby-core@rubyforge.org> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
_______________________________________________ Ironruby-core mailing list Ironruby-core@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
