On 5/23/06, Enterprise A. [email protected] wrote:
Curt H. wrote:
installer team. I have been asking for help repeatedly over the years
without much response. So far, only Ryan L. and Shashank D.
have
helped.
Well, maybe this is the real problem with the Ruby community then?
Asking for assistance over a number of years to get help on an installer
package that I’m sure thousands of people, companies, etc. use daily and
coming back with mostly deaf echos is not ideal.
I think the problem is far more one of the ‘Windows users community’.
Not many windows users know how to compile files, or have experience
with building an installer. Add to that, having the time, ability,
willingness to help, etc, and the group keeps getting smaller.
I do agree that it would be nice if more people helped, and I’m sure
as more windows users start using Ruby, more people (with the required
skills) will help.
Personally, I’ll look into NSIS, and see how much I can learn about
it, but even if I can pick it up, it’s more of a time crunch issue for
me these days. Then there’s the fact that I don’t need the most
recent release, and since I’m not paying Curt, Ryan, or Shashank to
produce one, I’m fine with waiting for it.
This installer is a
fundamental piece of Ruby being accepted by a larger audience (sorry but
Windows is still the dominant platform out there). I know a lot of
developers/companies that unless they get a timely pretty installer
package they won’t bother using it or allow it on a server. (I hear the
argument already “well we don’t want those types of developers
anyway”… Don’t we? Do we want critical mass or be a niche language?)
Indeed, it is accepted by a large audience. Probably because it works
well, and is updated frequently enough for most of us.
This is at least the third time in about a week that somebody has
presumed that ‘we want critical mass’ (or ‘enterprise’, or whatever).
Well, I can’t speak for ‘we’, but I don’t particularly care how many
people use Ruby, I just care that it exists, and I get to use it.
Ruby was much more of a niche language when I first started using it
(pre Rails), and even then, it was getting enough care and attention
for me. Since then, it’s usage has grown just fine on it’s own.
The point of my post was to eliminate the manual work that has to go
into a Ruby installer. Make it a lot more automated, flick a switch and
walk away.
Excellent idea. Build it, and set it up on a server for us. If you
can’t host it, I’m sure others will volunteer.
Even under ideal situations the Ruby Windows Installer is at
least a few days/weeks turn around time. Right now the 1.84 release is
going on 6 months. This is the reality right now.
On 5/23/06, Curt H. [email protected] wrote:
“The lag this time around is an anomaly.”
and…
“With the new build system it should be possible to reduce that lag
time to a few days.”
location. Nice and easy. When I look at the Ruby download site I see a
mis-mash of info and links leading off to other sites- it looks
unprofessional at best. Again, I’m looking at this from a company’s
eyes. First impressions mean a lot.
Ok, so the logical choices are…
Make a better build system, or at least spec one out, and see if you
can get others to build it for you.
Hire others to make a better build system.
Offer to sponsor it (ala Google’s Summer of Code).
Deal with the current build system, and use Ruby until others get the
chance to improve it.
Walk away, and use Python until the build system is improved.
I think that’s about it. Telling the people (who are doing all of
this for free) that they are ‘doing it wrong’ really doesn’t do much
to solve the problem.
