Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rbenv, an unobtrusive rvm replacement

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 115 posts

Re: Rbenv, an unobtrusive rvm replacement

#41

Post by bonzoesc »

moe wrote: post #37
alrs wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because going back to non-packaged non-vetted flavor-of-the-month code is a retrograde step back to 1993. You lose consistency, you lose the ability to reliably recreate a same environment, you lose tested and low-friction security updates, you lose dependency management, you lose the security of a crypto web-of-trust, and you lose the google-fu of being on the exact same versions of software as thousands of other pe…

Your arguments sound nice in theory. Yet I don't know a single ruby shop who runs with a distro-packaged ruby, even though REE is available as a .deb.

I use the Phusion-provided .debs for REE on Ubuntu.

Re: Rbenv, an unobtrusive rvm replacement

#42

Post by sciurus »

sanderjd wrote: post #31
alrs wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apt-pinning and source packages are great ways to bring newer Ruby in to Debian stab The first thing I did after you left our common former employer was ditch all of the manually-installed REE on Ubuntu and changed to Debian stable with .debs of ruby and rubygems pinned in from testing. It was an improvement.

I'm not familiar with the technique you're referring to, is there a reference you could point me to that discusses "apt-pinning" packages from testing? We recently had a "there must be a better way" moment trying to get a standardized Ruby 1.9.2 installation set up - I think what you're describing is that better way.

http://wiki.debian.org/AptPreferences#Pinning

Re: Rbenv, an unobtrusive rvm replacement

#43

Post by grimen »

Makes sense, though I'll stick to RVM until I change my mind - RVM floats my boat, haven't had any serios issues and I live in the shell. Bad short-term (community confusion), good long-term (evolution of initial innovation). I'm very neutral here.

I got a simple solution for all you distro vs RVM people: People who prefer to use RVM - use RVM, people who prefer to use distro - use distro. Until you have proven that a server that runs distro is 2x more valuable in $ - post on HN and we could review it again. Reminding you of that we don't live in a totally symmetric universe.

Re: Rbenv, an unobtrusive rvm replacement

#44

Post by nona »

moe wrote: post #37
alrs wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because going back to non-packaged non-vetted flavor-of-the-month code is a retrograde step back to 1993. You lose consistency, you lose the ability to reliably recreate a same environment, you lose tested and low-friction security updates, you lose dependency management, you lose the security of a crypto web-of-trust, and you lose the google-fu of being on the exact same versions of software as thousands of other pe…

Your arguments sound nice in theory. Yet I don't know a single ruby shop who runs with a distro-packaged ruby, even though REE is available as a .deb.

We do - nothing wrong with Debian stable's 1.8.7 and/or 1.9.2.

Re: Rbenv, an unobtrusive rvm replacement

#45

Post by alrs »

moe wrote: post #37
alrs wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because going back to non-packaged non-vetted flavor-of-the-month code is a retrograde step back to 1993. You lose consistency, you lose the ability to reliably recreate a same environment, you lose tested and low-friction security updates, you lose dependency management, you lose the security of a crypto web-of-trust, and you lose the google-fu of being on the exact same versions of software as thousands of other pe…

Your arguments sound nice in theory. Yet I don't know a single ruby shop who runs with a distro-packaged ruby, even though REE is available as a .deb.

I do this for a living, and I've used Debian-packaged Ruby wherever I've gone. I haven't experienced issues.

Re: Rbenv, an unobtrusive rvm replacement

#46

Post by grabastic »

sstephenson wrote: post #6

An official release with a web site and improved installation process should be out next week. If you're wondering "why would I use this instead of rvm?" be sure to read the readme: https://github.com/sstephenson/rbenv#readme

This looks very, very promising. Great work.

I've never liked how RVM overrides shell commands.

Re: Rbenv, an unobtrusive rvm replacement

#48

Post by mhansen »

cwjohnston wrote: post #18

Looks interesting. It's always been pretty amazing to me that a system like RVM remains so popular when it depends on overriding the operation of basic commands like 'cd'.

That's the main reason I'm not using RVM. I depend on `cd` to work, every time, rock solid, especially when my system is unstable. I can't risk having a dependency or bug in their `cd` script breaking my most commonly used shell command.

Re: Rbenv, an unobtrusive rvm replacement

#49

Post by stock_toaster »

sstephenson wrote: post #6

An official release with a web site and improved installation process should be out next week. If you're wondering "why would I use this instead of rvm?" be sure to read the readme: https://github.com/sstephenson/rbenv#readme

Wow. Looks great. Definitely going to give this a spin. Thanks! :)
Post reply on HN