> Issue #9438 has been updated by Hiroshi SHIBATA.
> We should use "Ruby".

This would imply that MRI is the only Ruby implementation, or at least
the only one that matters. I'd say this is very far from the truth as
there are quite a few different implementations out there. Rubinius and
JRuby are just two but there's also Maglev, Topaz and a few others.

Stating that Ruby and MRI are the same would lead to confusion. Because
of this one might think that JRuby and MRI are the same things when in
reality they're not.

In short, Ruby is the language and not the implementation. I could
create an implementation called CatRuby that's powered by cats, but that
wouldn't make Ruby and CatRuby identical to each other.

Personally I'd stick with MRI/CRuby as those are already the two
commonly used terms. CRuby is a bit more explicit about the underlying
technology whereas MRI is a bit more explicit about the people behind
it.