Also note, "Embedding a Ruby Interpreter" at http://www.rubycentral.com/book/ext_ruby.html is interesting reading in the same direction.
Joel On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 9:41 AM, doki_pen <[email protected]> wrote: > Tim Uckun wrote: >> >> >> Hope I'm not out in left field--any other thoughts? >> >> >> >> Here is my two cents... >> >> Shoes is a ruby distribution. It's only ruby distribution that allows you >> to pack up your ruby, your code, and gems (kind of) and ship it as a native >> application on the big three operating systems. >> IMHO this makes shoes the most innovative ruby distribution out there. >> There is nothing else like it. >> >> I don't think it should be a library, I think it should try even harder to >> be the best ruby distribution out there. It would be great if I could ship >> a rails application as a shoes executable. I think it would be awesome if I >> could run a shoes application as a daemon or a windows service. I want to be >> able to bundle up everything my application needs into an exe and send it to >> my friend and have him be able to use my application. >> >> Maybe shoes is two different platforms. Maybe it should be broken up into >> "the best way to distribute your ruby apps" and "the reddest, shiniest, most >> elaborately laced GUI framework". >> > > Whether or not dependencies should be packaged with applications is one of > the computer holy wars. It won't be solved here, or by shoes. Many people > have systems that take care of things like that and hate the idea of having > more then one version of the same library on their system. (mostly a > security problem.) It would be nice if it supported both ways of doing > things, but since I have contributed nothing, I'll keep my mouth shut and > enjoy what I am given. > -- joel
