>
>Could you point out some areas that are in dire need of documentation?
> I've been wanting to get involved with Ruby core documentation but
>haven't had a discrete task list to concentrate on.
How about updating doc/NEWS file, and sending patches to
<ruby-core@ruby-lang.org> list? Or we can set up Wiki pages for
cooperate documentation writing.
What about spec.ruby-doc.org? It's already got a lot of documentation for various aspects of 1.8, and I'd be ecstatic if it could be used as a cooperative place to document Ruby 1.9 as well.
- Charlie
···
In message "Re: Ruby 1.9.0 is released" > on Wed, 26 Dec 2007 13:08:21 +0900, "Jeremy McAnally" <jeremymcanally@gmail.com> writes:
hi, I'm a little confused. If it is released now, what is the one on
Synaptic list in Ubuntu 7.10?
Package: ruby1.9
Version: 1.9.0+20070830-2ubuntu1
Could anyone give an explanation?
Thank you.
ning
That's a copy from svn before release of 1.9.0 on August 30, 2007. The release
was on December 25, 2007, so you're missing 4 months of development.
Hopefully the ubuntu maintainers will take some time and update their package
soon.
>
> hi, I'm a little confused. If it is released now, what is the one on
> Synaptic list in Ubuntu 7.10?
> Package: ruby1.9
> Version: 1.9.0+20070830-2ubuntu1
> Could anyone give an explanation?
> Thank you.
> ning
> > > Could you point out some areas that are in dire need of documentation?
> > > I've been wanting to get involved with Ruby core documentation but
> > > haven't had a discrete task list to concentrate on.
> > > --Jeremy
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > >Great christmas gift! Thanks for guys hard worked.
> > > > We worked hard. But it's just a beginning. We still need to do a lot
> > > > of work on 1.9:
> > > > * preparing more detailed document of 1.9 changes than the current
> > > > doc/NEWS.
> > > > * some gems for obsolete and lost libraries, e.g. base64.
> > > > * migration path (and tools) from 1.8.
> > > > * document, document, document.
> > > > But let us rest for a while. We welcome volunteers.
> > > > Join <ruby-core@ruby-lang.org> list.
> > > > matz.
In message "Re: Ruby 1.9.0 is released" on Thu, 27 Dec 2007 02:52:17 +0900, Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@sun.com> writes:
How about updating doc/NEWS file, and sending patches to
<ruby-core@ruby-lang.org> list? Or we can set up Wiki pages for
cooperate documentation writing.
What about spec.ruby-doc.org? It's already got a lot of documentation
for various aspects of 1.8, and I'd be ecstatic if it could be used as a
cooperative place to document Ruby 1.9 as well.
It's a great place if they accept 1.9 changes in spec.
That would be fantastic. Perhaps we could branch the 1.8 spec and 1.9
spec so the work can continue on both?
--Jeremy
···
On Dec 26, 2007 12:52 PM, Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@sun.com> wrote:
Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In message "Re: Ruby 1.9.0 is released" > > on Wed, 26 Dec 2007 13:08:21 +0900, "Jeremy McAnally" <jeremymcanally@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >Could you point out some areas that are in dire need of documentation?
> > I've been wanting to get involved with Ruby core documentation but
> >haven't had a discrete task list to concentrate on.
>
> How about updating doc/NEWS file, and sending patches to
> <ruby-core@ruby-lang.org> list? Or we can set up Wiki pages for
> cooperate documentation writing.
What about spec.ruby-doc.org? It's already got a lot of documentation
for various aspects of 1.8, and I'd be ecstatic if it could be used as a
cooperative place to document Ruby 1.9 as well.
Quoth Nei Kai:
> hi, I'm a little confused. If it is released now, what is the one on
> Synaptic list in Ubuntu 7.10?
> Package: ruby1.9
> Version: 1.9.0+20070830-2ubuntu1
>
> Could anyone give an explanation?
+1
Congratulations Matz. Thank you for the latest release.
···
On Dec 25, 2007 8:57 PM, Konrad Meyer <konrad@tylerc.org> wrote:
> Thank you.
>
> ning
That's a copy from svn before release of 1.9.0 on August 30, 2007. The release
was on December 25, 2007, so you're missing 4 months of development.
Hopefully the ubuntu maintainers will take some time and update their package
soon.
I don't think ubuntu updates to new versions of software after the
initial release unless it's a bugfix release. I think Nei Kai would
have to compile Ruby 1.9.0 to get it.
···
On Dec 25, 2007 11:57 PM, Konrad Meyer <konrad@tylerc.org> wrote:
Quoth Nei Kai:
> hi, I'm a little confused. If it is released now, what is the one on
> Synaptic list in Ubuntu 7.10?
> Package: ruby1.9
> Version: 1.9.0+20070830-2ubuntu1
>
> Could anyone give an explanation?
> Thank you.
>
> ning
That's a copy from svn before release of 1.9.0 on August 30, 2007. The release
was on December 25, 2007, so you're missing 4 months of development.
Hopefully the ubuntu maintainers will take some time and update their package
soon.
note, there is also noobkit.com. It's being actively nurtured by AlexG
(I know since i've been tracking/using it..). An example is http://www.noobkit.com/show/ruby/ruby/ruby-core.html\. Friendly
interface, full search, and w active links/reference.. My point is, if
people can find things easily, then it would be easy to document..
kind regards -botp
···
On Dec 27, 2007 7:49 AM, Yukihiro Matsumoto <matz@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
In message "Re: Ruby 1.9.0 is released" > on Thu, 27 Dec 2007 02:52:17 +0900, Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@sun.com> writes:
>> How about updating doc/NEWS file, and sending patches to
>> <ruby-core@ruby-lang.org> list? Or we can set up Wiki pages for
>> cooperate documentation writing.
>What about spec.ruby-doc.org? It's already got a lot of documentation
>for various aspects of 1.8, and I'd be ecstatic if it could be used as a
>cooperative place to document Ruby 1.9 as well.
It's a great place if they accept 1.9 changes in spec.
That would be fantastic. Perhaps we could branch the 1.8 spec and 1.9
spec so the work can continue on both?
We could easily provide a 1.8 and 1.9 entry point, and they could cross-link whereever necessary. It would simply be a matter of adding some links to the front-page as it exists now and possibly splitting some existing articles into 1.8 and 1.9-compatible versions.
I can make this change any time (and of course, so can all of you)...shall I?
I control the wiki's hosting at the moment, so I could also set it up for multiple languages, if it would make it easier to get documentation up to have separate Japanese/English pages.
That would be great, Charles. I'm looking over what's there now and
hopefully I can start contributing after the holidays.
Thanks!
Jeremy
···
On Dec 27, 2007 10:29 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@sun.com> wrote:
Jeremy McAnally wrote:
> That would be fantastic. Perhaps we could branch the 1.8 spec and 1.9
> spec so the work can continue on both?
We could easily provide a 1.8 and 1.9 entry point, and they could
cross-link whereever necessary. It would simply be a matter of adding
some links to the front-page as it exists now and possibly splitting
some existing articles into 1.8 and 1.9-compatible versions.
I can make this change any time (and of course, so can all of
you)...shall I?
I control the wiki's hosting at the moment, so I could also set it up
for multiple languages, if it would make it easier to get documentation
up to have separate Japanese/English pages.
I'd like to get involved with this as well. Let me know when you're
going to start working on it.
Josh
···
On Dec 27, 2007 10:54 PM, Jeremy McAnally <jeremymcanally@gmail.com> wrote:
That would be great, Charles. I'm looking over what's there now and
hopefully I can start contributing after the holidays.
Thanks!
Jeremy
On Dec 27, 2007 10:29 AM, Charles Oliver Nutter <charles.nutter@sun.com> wrote:
> Jeremy McAnally wrote:
> > That would be fantastic. Perhaps we could branch the 1.8 spec and 1.9
> > spec so the work can continue on both?
>
> We could easily provide a 1.8 and 1.9 entry point, and they could
> cross-link whereever necessary. It would simply be a matter of adding
> some links to the front-page as it exists now and possibly splitting
> some existing articles into 1.8 and 1.9-compatible versions.
>
> I can make this change any time (and of course, so can all of
> you)...shall I?
>
> I control the wiki's hosting at the moment, so I could also set it up
> for multiple languages, if it would make it easier to get documentation
> up to have separate Japanese/English pages.
>
> - Charlie
>
>
The 1.9.0 Windows Binary download link is broken. The Christmas Day 2007
Windows binaries appear to be here: ftp://ftp.ruby-lang.org/pub/ruby/binaries/mswin32/unstable/
I just wanted to let you guys know about this. 1.9.0 has been very fun
to experiment with so far. Thanks again for the great work!