Proposal to introduce "port select ruby"

[Rainer Müller]

Hello,

I appreciate this effort!

On 2013-03-04 13:22, kimura wataru wrote:
> - avoid conflicts between port:ruby and port:ruby19
>     - add suffix "1.8" to commands of port:ruby. (bin/ruby1.8)

As soon as this is merged we need to ensure that all ports use
bin/ruby1.8 that were using bin/ruby before. If you just commit this
change, ports will pick up the wrong version of ruby.

I think it would make more sense to add both bin/ruby and bin/ruby1.8
first to the ruby1.8 port. Then give maintainers some time to switch to
ruby1.8 and finally remove bin/ruby from the port.

> - avoid conflicts between port:rb-* and port:rb19-*. 
>   install commands like perl5's p5.nn-*, such as port:p5.12-app-ack.
>     - commands without suffix under ${prefix}/libexec/ruby${branch}/
>     - suffixed commands under ${prefix}/bin/

We should decide if we want to follow the naming scheme of python by
using rb19-* or with perl by using rb1.9-*.

> ## file hierarchy
> 
> 	${prefix}/bin
> 	    ruby1.8        - port:ruby
> 	    ruby1.9        - port:ruby19
> 	    nanoc3-1.8     - port:rb-nanoc3
> 	    nanoc3-1.9     - port:rb19-nanoc3
> 	${prefix}/libexec/
> 	    ruby1.8/nanoc3 - port:rb-nanoc3
> 	    ruby1.9/nanoc3 - port:rb19-nanoc3

I don't know what it is used for, but it seems like nanoc* comes from a
different port. This should get its own select group then, like ipython.
Otherwise we would create dangling symlinks if rb*-nanoc is not installed...

> 	${prefix}/etc/select/ruby
> 	    base           - port:ruby_select
> 	    none           - port:ruby_select
> 	    ruby18         - port:ruby
> 	    ruby19         - port:ruby19

This looks good!

Rainer