From luislavena at gmail.com  Mon Jun 29 00:46:38 2009
From: luislavena at gmail.com (Luis Lavena)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 01:46:38 -0300
Subject: [Mongrel-development] Mongrel for 1.9, for real?
Message-ID: <71166b3b0906282146n647d9c09ke18f59204e01f76e@mail.gmail.com>

Hey Guys,

Heads up on this...

I want to pursue release an updated Mongrel gem that can compile and
run under Windows Ruby 1.8 and 1.9

This is due the preview1 versions of the installer just released:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/browse_thread/thread/c38255aacd68d6dc

For that purpose, 1.1.5 needs to be updated:

- consider MinGW as valid platform (it doesn't)
- change RSTRING macros

Now, I've struggled all day trying to figure out from where I should
get all the pieces to move forward, all without success.

Patched several Rakefiles to get extensions build, but tests fails.
Patched extension to get Ruby 1.9, and tests stall.

Cannot release a Gem for Windows since Echoe hook itself and don't let
rake-compiler tasks run well.

So: Should I consider Mongrel (and fauna/mongrel) repository dead and
move forward?

Mongrel is still being actively used by MANY users, even some moved to
Passenger, or Thin, Mongrel is still an excellent option.

I just want the "team" answer so I decide to invest time on getting
that fixed or invest time on getting "another project inspired by
Mongrel" build properly on Windows.

Please let me know as soon as possible in your agenda, since I'm
expecting lot of reports of failures when using the preview1
installers.

Thanks in advance for the feedback and your time.

Regards,
-- 
Luis Lavena
AREA 17
-
Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add,
but rather when there is nothing more to take away.
Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry

From evan at cloudbur.st  Mon Jun 29 01:41:50 2009
From: evan at cloudbur.st (Evan Weaver)
Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 22:41:50 -0700
Subject: [Mongrel-development] Mongrel for 1.9, for real?
In-Reply-To: <71166b3b0906282146n647d9c09ke18f59204e01f76e@mail.gmail.com>
References: <71166b3b0906282146n647d9c09ke18f59204e01f76e@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b6f68fc60906282241n527e2de9o5ed2f4a252107d9f@mail.gmail.com>

Ugh, sorry. Mongrel is not dead, but rather severely neglected by me.

We still use it at Twitter, for what it's worth. I will gather up the
1.9 bits I have and send you the details.

What cross-compilation strategy did you want to use for MinGW?

Evan

On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 9:46 PM, Luis Lavena<luislavena at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Guys,
>
> Heads up on this...
>
> I want to pursue release an updated Mongrel gem that can compile and
> run under Windows Ruby 1.8 and 1.9
>
> This is due the preview1 versions of the installer just released:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/browse_thread/thread/c38255aacd68d6dc
>
> For that purpose, 1.1.5 needs to be updated:
>
> - consider MinGW as valid platform (it doesn't)
> - change RSTRING macros
>
> Now, I've struggled all day trying to figure out from where I should
> get all the pieces to move forward, all without success.
>
> Patched several Rakefiles to get extensions build, but tests fails.
> Patched extension to get Ruby 1.9, and tests stall.
>
> Cannot release a Gem for Windows since Echoe hook itself and don't let
> rake-compiler tasks run well.
>
> So: Should I consider Mongrel (and fauna/mongrel) repository dead and
> move forward?
>
> Mongrel is still being actively used by MANY users, even some moved to
> Passenger, or Thin, Mongrel is still an excellent option.
>
> I just want the "team" answer so I decide to invest time on getting
> that fixed or invest time on getting "another project inspired by
> Mongrel" build properly on Windows.
>
> Please let me know as soon as possible in your agenda, since I'm
> expecting lot of reports of failures when using the preview1
> installers.
>
> Thanks in advance for the feedback and your time.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Luis Lavena
> AREA 17
> -
> Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add,
> but rather when there is nothing more to take away.
> Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry
> _______________________________________________
> Mongrel-development mailing list
> Mongrel-development at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/mongrel-development
>



-- 
Evan Weaver

From luislavena at gmail.com  Mon Jun 29 02:26:00 2009
From: luislavena at gmail.com (Luis Lavena)
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 03:26:00 -0300
Subject: [Mongrel-development] Mongrel for 1.9, for real?
In-Reply-To: <b6f68fc60906282241n527e2de9o5ed2f4a252107d9f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <71166b3b0906282146n647d9c09ke18f59204e01f76e@mail.gmail.com> 
	<b6f68fc60906282241n527e2de9o5ed2f4a252107d9f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <71166b3b0906282326r280ee292gd064fcfb768402e0@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 2:41 AM, Evan Weaver<evan at cloudbur.st> wrote:
> Ugh, sorry. Mongrel is not dead, but rather severely neglected by me.
>

And me. Been focusing a lot on RubyInstaller and the related tools.

> We still use it at Twitter, for what it's worth. I will gather up the
> 1.9 bits I have and send you the details.
>

Cool, you know my email already ;-)

> What cross-compilation strategy did you want to use for MinGW?
>

rake-compiler and fat binaries:

http://github.com/luislavena/rake-compiler/tree/

Cheers,
-- 
Luis Lavena
AREA 17
-
Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add,
but rather when there is nothing more to take away.
Antoine de Saint-Exup?ry