> Ahh, reading Ivan's message, it's obvious now - to automatically select a
> ruby per project.
> Are there other common uses?
>

I think that's the primary one.

Ben, in terms of complexity, maybe I am missing something, but installing
RVM took me the least amount of time.
http://blog.approache.com/2011/05/setting-up-ubuntu-1104-server-for-rails.html

And later installing Ruby was a breath. I don't really feel like it adds
complexity.





>
> —Ben
>
>
> On 28/07/2011, at 1:33 PM, Simon Russell wrote:
>
> > I work with Michael Pearson; I'm one of the people who torments him by
> > insisting on checking in .rvmrc files.  I'm probably also one of the
> > people who doesn't have a problem with RVM in production, but I
> > haven't tried using some of the more recent releases.  Certainly the
> > random changes don't help.  It seems that if Wayne stopped insisting
> > people always use the latest version, it wouldn't be such a problem to
> > automate.
> >
> > As for .rvmrc, I haven't yet heard a good reason why checking it in is
> > bad, and I can think of a few reasons it's convenient.  I can be
> > convinced though; and I haven't done a lot of searching to find
> > opinions conflicting with mine :)
> >
> > Simon.
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 13:15, Julio Cesar Ody <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >> Which is what I said on the first email I sent to the thread. Michael
> >> was talking specifically about sandboxing gems.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thursday, July 28, 2011, Dmytrii Nagirniak <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 28 July 2011 12:25, Julio Cesar Ody <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> @ Michael: agreed, that's what Bundler is for. Again, should you
> >>> always run your apps on the same version of Ruby, it is a waste of
> >>> time.
> >>>
> >>> That's not why RVM exists. If everything you run is on one ruby version
> then there's no point of using RVM at all.In this case RVM is a tool that
> solves no problem.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> But if you do need multiple versions of Ruby - RVM is the right tool
> for the job.
> >>> At least that's my view on it.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Pat Allan <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >>>> I don't like the idea of checked-in .rvmrc files at all - granted, I
> don't work with any large teams though :)
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Pat
> >>>>
> >>>> On 28/07/2011, at 12:15 PM, Michael Pearson wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> The .rvmrc thing was the easiest to work around, and if we'd really
> needed them, I would have either hacked/forked RVM. I'm the only developer
> at my work that thinks that .rvmrc checked into a repo is a bad idea :)
> (gemsets? that's what bundler is for! and we're all using ruby-1.9.2
> anyway!)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It was the constant changes to the install process / defaults that
> killed it for me.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Julio Cesar Ody <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>> Yeah, I read it.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> http://serverfault.com/questions/227510/is-it-possible-to-skip-rvmrc-confirmation
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Michael Pearson
> >>>>> The Bon Scotts; http://www.thebonscotts.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group.
> >>>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> >>>>> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en.
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group.
> >>>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> >>>> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group.
> >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> >>> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group.
> >>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> >>> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en.
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group.
> >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> >> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> > For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en.
> >
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Ruby or Rails Oceania" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby 
or Rails Oceania" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/rails-oceania?hl=en.

Reply via email to