Ruby 2.3

[Vít Ondruch]

Hi everybody,

I needed to check something in development version of Ruby today, so it
was good opportunity to prepare updated package with the latest bits.
I'll keep updating the sources in dist git private branch [1]. This
should be the scratch build (if it succeeds):

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=8810288

As always, let me know if you encounter any issues.

Vít

[1] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ruby.git/log/?h=private-ruby-2.3

[Vít Ondruch]

Hello Rubyists,

Another update, this time to r49705. Please find the changes in
privare-ruby-2.3 branch in dist git and here is the scratch build for
your testing:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9040761

Feedback is welcomed.

Vít

[Vít Ondruch]

Hi All,

Another month passed and you might be interested in new development
snapshot. So here it is:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9335347

This time it is r50092. The .spec file is in private-ruby-2.3 branch.

Please note that there were some concerns about empty ruby_version [1],
so I modified the patch and ruby_version is not empty anymore. But that
does not mean the issue is resolved. Hence I opened upstream ticket
about this matter [2].

Let me know if anything is wrong.

Happy testing ;)

Vít

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=923703
[2] https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11002

Dne 23.2.2015 v 17:41 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Hello Rubyists,
>
> Another update, this time to r49705. Please find the changes in
> privare-ruby-2.3 branch in dist git and here is the scratch build for
> your testing:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9040761
>
> Feedback is welcomed.
>
> Vít
> _______________________________________________
> ruby-sig mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig

[Allen Hewes]

Vit,
> Please note that there were some concerns about empty ruby_version [1],
> so I modified the patch and ruby_version is not empty anymore. But that
> does not mean the issue is resolved. Hence I opened upstream ticket
> about this matter [2].

+1 for bringing back the ruby_version.

I see your point about the mess it can make, but if you don't use the configure argument, it's handled as one would expect. Right?

Fedora is the first place where I have seen where this autoconf option being used/set explicitly.

/allen

________________________________

Disclaimer Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail, and any attachments and/or documents linked to this email, are intended for the addressee and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, proprietary, or otherwise protected by law. Any dissemination, distribution, or copying is prohibited. This notice serves as a confidentiality marking for the purpose of any confidentiality or nondisclosure agreement. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the original sender.

[Vít Ondruch]

Yet another update:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9399395

This time, it is r50153. I modified further modified the ruby_version
patches and submitted they upstream. Will see if they are accepted.

Vít

Dne 27.3.2015 v 10:13 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Hi All,
>
> Another month passed and you might be interested in new development
> snapshot. So here it is:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9335347
>
> This time it is r50092. The .spec file is in private-ruby-2.3 branch.
>
> Please note that there were some concerns about empty ruby_version [1],
> so I modified the patch and ruby_version is not empty anymore. But that
> does not mean the issue is resolved. Hence I opened upstream ticket
> about this matter [2].
>
> Let me know if anything is wrong.
>
> Happy testing ;)
>
> Vít
>
> [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=923703
> [2] https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11002
>
> Dne 23.2.2015 v 17:41 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> > Hello Rubyists,
> >
> > Another update, this time to r49705. Please find the changes in
> > privare-ruby-2.3 branch in dist git and here is the scratch build for
> > your testing:
> >
> > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9040761
> >
> > Feedback is welcomed.
> >
> > Vít
> > _______________________________________________
> > ruby-sig mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig
>
> ruby-sig mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig

[Vít Ondruch]

Hi Rubyists,

I updated yet again private-ruby-2.3 branch dist git and this time it is
r50329. You can give a try to this scratch build:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9493028

Looking forward to your feedback.

Vít

[Vít Ondruch]

Hi All,

I updated yet again private-ruby-2.3 branch dist git and this time it is
r50427. You can give a try to this scratch build:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=9657235

Looking forward to your feedback.

Vít

[Vít Ondruch]

Hi all,

Another snapshot of Ruby is here, this time r50815. You can find the
sources in private-ruby-2.3 branch of Ruby's dist-git or play with the
scratch build:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10015356

Some notable changes includes:

* New (un)bundled net-telnet gem. This is now available as subpackage
and I you have to install this package explicitly if you are using this
functionality.
* There were done some improvements in a way how the bundled gems are
installed. This means that the .gemspec files of bundled gems are now
valid out of the box and can be better integrated with Bundler.

Please let me know about any possible issues you encounter during your
testing.

Vít

[Vít Ondruch]

Hi everybody,

Here is another snapshot of Ruby 2.3:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10460738

This time it is r51358. You can find the .spec file in dist-git in
private-ruby-2.3 branch.

One noteworthy change is included RubyGems 2.5, which ships with new
resolver. Unfortunately, this resolver is bundled Molinillo. I tried to
convince upstream, that this is not the best idea [1], but unfortunately
I was not successful. So we should probably discuss with FPC, since the
same happened to Bundler recently (and that is actually the reason, why
we don't have the most recent version of Bundler in Fedora).

Vít

[1] https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/pull/1189

[Vít Ondruch]

Hi all,

Here is yet another development snapshot of Ruby 2.3, this time r51643:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10756026

Last time I mentioned bundled Molinillo in RubyGems. I moved forward
with this and asked FPC for exception:

https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/560

Please give it try and let me know if anything goes wrong.

Vít

[Vít Ondruch]

Hi all,

Here is yet another snapshot release of Ruby 2.3, this time r51741:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=10939306

This time it looks to be pretty boring update, but let me know if you
note something worth of attention.

BTW last time I mentioned I asked exception for bundling Molinillo in
Rubgems [1], which was approved. On contrary, I was suggested to drop
rubygem-bundler from Fedora. I don't think this is good idea ....

Vít

[1] https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/560

[Vít Ondruch]

Hi there,

And here is another development version of Ruby:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11093674

This time, it is r51856. You can find the .spec file in dist-git in
private-ruby-2.3 branch.

One notable change is introduction of did_you_mean gem [1], which should
give you better hint if you misspell some method name. This gem is
shipped in rubygem-did_you_mean subpackage. Actually, thinking about it,
it is not installed by default, so now I wonder when/where it will
crash, probably something to investigate. Also note that since I am
lazy, the NVR of did_you_mean contains the .beta2 string, which means
that it won't be upgraded to 1.0.0 release when time comes, but this is
just test release, so you can handle that ;)

Please let me know about any issues you might discover.

Vít

[1] https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/11252

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 16.9.2015 v 09:44 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Actually, thinking about it, it is not installed by default, so now I wonder when/where it will crash, probably something to investigate.

Found it, it is optionally loaded in gem_prelude.rb [1]. So what
dependency should I use? Recommends or Suggests? I'll go probably with
Recommends, so it is installed by default to keep the user experience,
but you can remove it in case you wish to minimize the install size.
Thoughts?

Vít

[1]
https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/40f304e025dbaeb954e2c324836ab4cf23f12053

[Josef Stribny]

+1 on recommends.

Josef

On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Vít Ondruch  
wrote:
> Dne 16.9.2015 v 09:44 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> > Actually, thinking about it, it is not installed by default, so now 
> > I wonder when/where it will crash, probably something to investigate.
>
> Found it, it is optionally loaded in gem_prelude.rb [1]. So what
> dependency should I use? Recommends or Suggests? I'll go probably with
> Recommends, so it is installed by default to keep the user experience,
> but you can remove it in case you wish to minimize the install size.
> Thoughts?
>
> Vít
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/40f304e025dbaeb954e2c324836ab4cf23f12053
> _______________________________________________
> ruby-sig mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig

[Vít Ondruch]

Hi all,

So here is yet another development snapshot, this time r52191:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11498397

Sources are available in private-ruby-2.3 branch of Ruby dist-git as always.

Notable changes from packaging point of view are:

1) Weak dependencies are used where possible [1]. This means that using
DNF, you don't have to install rubygems if you don't need them. Or you
don't have to install rubygem-rdoc if you don't want to genereate RDoc
documentation. But of course they are installed by default. So the user
experience should be the same.

2) The %gem_install macro now uses the fixed --build-root parameter, as
I previously mentioned in [2].

Please let me know if you'll find any issues with this release.

Thx

Vít

[1]
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/ruby.git/commit/?h=private-ruby-2.3&i...
[2]
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/ruby-sig/2015-September/001812.htm...

[Vít Ondruch]

Hi all,

Here is another test build of Ruby 2.3, this time r52392:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11640109

Let me know if you notice some issues.

Vít

Ruby 2.3 preview1

[Vít Ondruch]

Hi,

Since we are nearing to stable release of Ruby 2.3, upstream release
first Ruby 2.3 preview1 snapshot. Here is the release announcement:

http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/71450

and here you can grab the package for testing:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11805569

As always, let me know if you encounter any issues with the package.

Vít

Ruby 2.3 preview1

[Josef Stribny]

I briefly tested the builds together with the new changes like 
did_you_mean? gem and frozen strings features.

Seems to be working.

Best
Josef

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 5:42 PM, Vít Ondruch  
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Since we are nearing to stable release of Ruby 2.3, upstream release
> first Ruby 2.3 preview1 snapshot. Here is the release announcement:
>
> http://blade.nagaokaut.ac.jp/cgi-bin/scat.rb/ruby/ruby-core/71450
>
> and here you can grab the package for testing:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11805569
>
> As always, let me know if you encounter any issues with the package.
>
> Vít
> _______________________________________________
> ruby-sig mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig

[Vít Ondruch]

Hi everybody,

Here is yet another test release of upcoming Ruby 2.3, this time r52759:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=11993896

Please test the package and let me know if you encounter any issues.

Vít

Ruby 2.3 preview2

[Vít Ondruch]

Hi everybody,

You probably noticed that new preview release of Ruby was released [1].
Therefore I updated the .spec file in private-ruby-2.3 dist-git branch
and here is the build:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12195641

ARM build have not succeeded, but I am not going for another attempt,
since it is quite hard to make successful Ruby build these days due to
bug in glibc [2].

Among other things interesting in this release, I'd like highlight this
new feature:

RubyVM::InstructionSequence#to_binary and .load_from_binary are
introduced as experimental features. With these features, we can make an
ISeq (bytecode) pre-compilation system.

And as always, please let me know if you encounter any issues.

Thanks,

Vít

[1]
https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2015/12/11/ruby-2-3-0-preview2-released/
[2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1281714

[Vít Ondruch]

Hi all,

Here is the latest development version of Ruby 2.3, r53264 this time:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=12294564

Since the official release of Ruby 2.3 should be coming out at 25th of
December, i.e. in two days, I hope this is the last test build for this
development cycle. So if you can, please test the build and let me know
if there is some issue.

I hope that right after Christmas, we will be able to proceed with Ruby
2.3 for F24+ and with subsequent rebuild of ruby packages with binary
extensions.

Best,

Vít