On Thu, 2006-01-19 at 10:34 +0000, Karanbir Singh wrote: > Craig White wrote: > > As for ruby - perhaps upstream is so focused on eclipse that it ignores > > rails and thus ruby as a language might be fine at 1.8.1 but as those > > who have checked it out, know that rails is a rapidly moving target and > > upstream isn't covering it. > > Now would also be a good time to point out that rubyonrails was only > released as a stable 1 oh release just about a month back - and is still > regarded as many people ( who use it ) to need work before it will work > in an enterprise environment. And a lot of the other support components > that people tend to want to use with rONr is still rated as Alpha or > Beta grade code. > > Second point, the ruby pkgs in dev.centos.org are not maintained as a > part of Enterprise Linux by Upstream, and are liable to break apart, > destroy your machine, cause major business loss and blah blah blah ( the > point being that those pkgs are NOT EL maintained code at upstream, so > keep that in mind ). ---- definitely understood. My understanding was that rONr (I like that), was give stable 1 like July or August but I am not knowledgable on these things. I also recognize the churn within the project. I definitely realized Upstream problem which is why I asked on list - and to my surprise found out about dev.centos.org packages. I will consider only that I employ at my own risk - that is why I have a separate server for this and wondered if my choice of CentOS 4 needed to be evaluated in favor of FC-4 and I think I can stay put at CentOS 4 As a side note...I now know what a high volume mail list and centos-list, fedora-list are low volume compared to rails at rubyonrails.org list (where I am getting roughly 400 messages a day). Clearly there is some magic happening there. Thanks for the efforts Karanbir and Jim. Craig