Hey Ben,

If you do 1.9.2 from source and have only one ruby, how does that fit
with babushka needing a ruby to bootstrap itself?

Cheers,
Chris


On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Ben Hoskings <[email protected]> wrote:
> My answer is kind of "don't run 2 versions; everything should be on 1.9.2 
> anyway." :)
>
> I realise that's idealised, but I do think it's OK for there to be a cost to 
> running legacy stuff.
>
> But that's a different discussion altogether. As for an actual answer, I'd 
> just use a separate server. If they're big apps they should have their own 
> servers anyway, and if they're small, a little VPS is cheap (less than an 
> hour's work per month; i.e. it would cost more to configure multiple rubies).
>
> —Ben
>
>
> On 28/07/2011, at 2:15 PM, Dmytrii Nagirniak wrote:
>
>> Michael, Ben,
>>
>> I see what you mean now.
>>
>> In case of "toy" production env (which most of us has) - I guess it doesn't
>> matter that much.
>>
>> For the "real" large environment involving a lot of setup, maintenance and
>> many people - it's a difference.
>> But in the latter scenario it would probably be a single app for the company
>> with one Ruby version. So RVM is just a wrong tool anyway.
>>
>> But what other options do we have to run 2 ruby versions?
>>
>>
>> On 28 July 2011 14:07, Ben Hoskings <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> I don't mean setup difficulty - I agree RVM is really easy to set up.
>>>
>>> I mean, if you have path issues on the production box, or something else
>>> breaking the ruby runtime, it's an order of magnitude easier to debug if RVM
>>> isn't involved, because there's no shell fiddling going on.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 28/07/2011, at 1:53 PM, Dmytrii Nagirniak wrote:
>>>
>>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> 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