Greetings,
There was not release of the Ruby One-click Installer with version 1.8.3. Anyone heard of plans of One-click Installer plan to include 1.8.4 and any target release timeframe?
Thanks,
Dany
Yes. Search for it. This is the fifth time that this has been asked.
The answer has not changed.
-austin
···
On 03/01/06, Dany Cayouette <danyc@nospam.gmail.com> wrote:
Greetings,
There was not release of the Ruby One-click Installer with version
1.8.3. Anyone heard of plans of One-click Installer plan to include
1.8.4 and any target release timeframe?
--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com
* Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca
Austin Ziegler wrote:
1.8.3. Anyone heard of plans of One-click Installer plan to include
1.8.4 and any target release timeframe?Yes. Search for it. This is the fifth time that this has been asked.
The answer has not changed.
Wow. This is how I imagine comp.lang.lisp acts. Just in my imagination though.
Dany, the most recent thread was entitled "why there's no ruby 1.8.4 for win-one-click-installer?". In that thread, Curt Hibbs, who maintains the OCI, mentioned that the installer is a bunch of work (rebuilding all extensions, testing, etc.), is not an intrinsic part of Ruby, and that it will take him some time to get caught up (he has a day job too). Several suggestions were passed back to Curt on how he might reduce that time (reducing complexity / removing extensions, automation of build-test-packaging, or even convincing a 3rd party, like ActiveState, to get involved). Furthermore, Matz replied that there is always "ActiveScriptRuby" at http://arton.hp.infoseek.co.jp/index.html\.
In the end though, if you want the 1.8.4 OCI, you'll have to be patient.
--Steve
···
On 03/01/06, Dany Cayouette <danyc@nospam.gmail.com> wrote:
If someone doesn't bother to search the list first, a short answer is
fine.
Robert
I'm working in it. It should be sometime this month, but I can't say
exactly when.
Thanks for your patience,
Curt
···
On 1/3/06, Stephen Waits <steve@waits.net> wrote:
Austin Ziegler wrote:
> On 03/01/06, Dany Cayouette <danyc@nospam.gmail.com> wrote:
>> 1.8.3. Anyone heard of plans of One-click Installer plan to include
>> 1.8.4 and any target release timeframe?
>
> Yes. Search for it. This is the fifth time that this has been asked.
> The answer has not changed.Wow. This is how I imagine comp.lang.lisp acts. Just in my imagination
though.Dany, the most recent thread was entitled "why there's no ruby 1.8.4 for
win-one-click-installer?". In that thread, Curt Hibbs, who maintains
the OCI, mentioned that the installer is a bunch of work (rebuilding all
extensions, testing, etc.), is not an intrinsic part of Ruby, and that
it will take him some time to get caught up (he has a day job too).
Several suggestions were passed back to Curt on how he might reduce that
time (reducing complexity / removing extensions, automation of
build-test-packaging, or even convincing a 3rd party, like ActiveState,
to get involved). Furthermore, Matz replied that there is always
"ActiveScriptRuby" at http://arton.hp.infoseek.co.jp/index.html\.In the end though, if you want the 1.8.4 OCI, you'll have to be patient.
--Steve
This is, as I said, the fifth time in less than TWO WEEKS. I'm not
Curt, but I'd be pretty sick of hearing the question by now. I've been
working in parallel with Curt (not in contact with, but he is aware of
what I'm doing) to make it so that everything can be built with the
Visual C++ 2005 Express Edition. I've got nearly everything working
with the base compile, and now I'm working on making sure that certain
features work the way that they're supposed to given that Visual C++
2005 has changed its compile mechanism (and making changes to the way
that zlib is included, since zlib.org has some guidelines on shipping
when compiled with anything other than MS VC++ 6).
It almost ALWAYS takes a minimum of two weeks to get the one-click
installer's first release candidate, because there's a *lot* there.
Frankly, I was too short with Dany. But "ruby 1.8.4 one click
installer" returns this as its first item:
It's not hard to find, and I think that it's polite of the asker to
have at least done a little google searching first. (To compare: I
have been trying to get OpenSSL compiled properly with VC++ 2005 since
26 December. I downloaded the latest snapshot for several days to see
if a particular problem was fixed. I also worked with the OpenSSL CVS
repository to review the changes from the OpenSSL 0.9.8 release. It
wasn't until yesterday that I posted a question to openssl-dev to ask
about the problem when I was certain that I had exhausted what I could
do. Last night, I posted a patch to their build process to fix other
problems that I was having. I'm not saying everyone should go to the
lengths that I did, but I am saying that it's generally a good idea to
at least do a little working.)
-austin
···
On 03/01/06, Stephen Waits <steve@waits.net> wrote:
Austin Ziegler wrote:
> On 03/01/06, Dany Cayouette <danyc@nospam.gmail.com> wrote:
>> 1.8.3. Anyone heard of plans of One-click Installer plan to include
>> 1.8.4 and any target release timeframe?
> Yes. Search for it. This is the fifth time that this has been asked.
> The answer has not changed.
Wow. This is how I imagine comp.lang.lisp acts. Just in my imagination
though.
--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com
* Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca
Sincere apologies to the list, for the noise. Austin's response was appropriate... I meant to save my message as a draft... not send it.
In my defense, sequence of events was:
I didn't manage to keep up to date with this list in December, so I started on a 'blank' sheet for the new year. Scan over Tim Sutherland's weekly news, where I learned that 1.8.4 was out! Got excited and looked to see if One-Click Installer had 1.8.4 already. This is when I noticed no one-click installer with 1.8.3 and prompted my question for 1.8.4. Started to type email during the day and got sidetracked. At the end of the day, while closing apps, I meant to save my message as a draft but hit the send button instead (duh!).
Wanted to give an explaination so I don't get ignored in future postings 
I usually do my research... my brain is still on vacation mode...
Austin, sorry to use up your time.. certainly no offense taken by your answer
Curt, thanks for the One-Click installer!!
Steve, thanks for the nice answer to a silly question..
Again, sorry all for the noise!
Regards,
Dany
Austin Ziegler wrote:
Austin Ziegler wrote:
>> 1.8.3. Anyone heard of plans of One-click Installer plan to include
>> 1.8.4 and any target release timeframe?
> Yes. Search for it. This is the fifth time that this has been asked.
> The answer has not changed.
Wow. This is how I imagine comp.lang.lisp acts. Just in my imagination
though.This is, as I said, the fifth time in less than TWO WEEKS. I'm not
Curt, but I'd be pretty sick of hearing the question by now. I've been
working in parallel with Curt (not in contact with, but he is aware of
what I'm doing) to make it so that everything can be built with the
Visual C++ 2005 Express Edition. I've got nearly everything working
with the base compile, and now I'm working on making sure that certain
features work the way that they're supposed to given that Visual C++
2005 has changed its compile mechanism (and making changes to the way
that zlib is included, since zlib.org has some guidelines on shipping
when compiled with anything other than MS VC++ 6).It almost ALWAYS takes a minimum of two weeks to get the one-click
installer's first release candidate, because there's a *lot* there.Frankly, I was too short with Dany. But "ruby 1.8.4 one click
installer" returns this as its first item:Ruby 1.8.4 - Ruby - Ruby-Forum
It's not hard to find, and I think that it's polite of the asker to
have at least done a little google searching first. (To compare: I
have been trying to get OpenSSL compiled properly with VC++ 2005 since
26 December. I downloaded the latest snapshot for several days to see
if a particular problem was fixed. I also worked with the OpenSSL CVS
repository to review the changes from the OpenSSL 0.9.8 release. It
wasn't until yesterday that I posted a question to openssl-dev to ask
about the problem when I was certain that I had exhausted what I could
do. Last night, I posted a patch to their build process to fix other
problems that I was having. I'm not saying everyone should go to the
lengths that I did, but I am saying that it's generally a good idea to
at least do a little working.)-austin
Personally I find your answer arrogant in all possible ways.
If a person comes here for the first time and DOESN'T know to look
elsewhere first, HOW THE HELL WOULD HE KNOW TO LOOK ELSWHERE FIRST!
Noobs need answers, not intellectual brutism!
The Ruby community is supposedly known as 'friendly', well you shot that
all to shit Austin!
I don't care what your excuse is.
···
On 03/01/06, Stephen Waits <steve@waits.net> wrote:
> On 03/01/06, Dany Cayouette <danyc@nospam.gmail.com> wrote:
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/\.
Personally I find your answer arrogant in all possible ways.
You're welcome to do so.
If a person comes here for the first time and DOESN'T know to look
elsewhere first, HOW THE HELL WOULD HE KNOW TO LOOK ELSWHERE FIRST!
Um. Google? Google groups if nothing else? If you're looking for a
*new* version of something, wouldn't you use a search engine before
asking people to answer you?
Noobs need answers, not intellectual brutism!
The Ruby community is supposedly known as 'friendly', well you shot that
all to shit Austin!I don't care what your excuse is.
No excuse. I'm just tired of people asking questions for things that
can be discovered very simply. No more, no less. As far as I know,
Curt isn't paid to do work on Ruby. I'm not paid to do work on Ruby.
Any work that I do is because I enjoy doing it. If I get annoyed
because someone is asking the same question that five people before
have asked (and, again, a search would have demonstrably found the
definitive answer), don't be surprised.
But what I have noticed is that the number of people who post via
ruby-forum.com seem to use the search feature less than those of us
who use other means of posting. Or is it just me?
-austin
···
On 18/01/06, Paul <graemer@meeker.org> wrote:
--
Austin Ziegler * halostatue@gmail.com
* Alternate: austin@halostatue.ca