Ruby 1.9 port

[Jay Levitt]

Rainer wrote:

> It is the naming convention for MacPorts as it was borrowed from FreeBSD ports.

Shows what I know...

> And this "not production-ready" is not clear either. My webhoster provides 1.9
> in the standard basic web plan already. Of course, Matz has not announced
> it to be stable release, but it is features-frozen quite a while. 

Right, that's more what I meant.  It's not supposed to be a drop-in 
replacement for 1.8; there are deliberate incompatibilities.  And I 
assume anything using threads is likely to have some bugs with the new 
threading scheme.

> Those are the reasons why I think the name should be ruby19, i.e.
> a new package in the namespace.
> 
> But I wonder how to deal with all the libraries then. That
> can probably only be fixed by adding again all the rb packages
> as rb19 or something, like it is with python already.

I would think that's a good thing, just like the conservative switch to 
parallel makes; you can add an rb19 dependency once you know that the 
package actually works with Ruby 1.9.

This is only going to get more complex as things like JRuby gain 
currency; now any gems that depend on native extensions won't work, etc.

Jay