Ben Giddings <bg-rubytalk / infofiend.com> wrote:
> Thoughts?

As someone who's been lightly dabbling with Ruby recently (and is not
about to stop), you make several good points.

I can't get rid of the lingering feeling that Ruby is still somewhat
immature/unpolished.  Part of the reason is lack of documentation and
sometimes the documentation that I do use is plain wrong or
out-of-date because the Ruby API changes from release to release.  Of
course, I'm using RubyCentral for most of my documentation needs --
they've done a fantastic job, but that's hardly official or
up-to-date.

Some things I still have no explanation for, such as why there are
mutually incompatible Time and DateTime classes with different
functionality.  

Taking off my user's hat though and looking at it from an OpenSource
project perspective, I imagine the real problem is that there's
probably not enough people willing to do real work on ruby-lang.org.
In that case, relying on independent sites to fulfil the project needs
remains the best bet...  unless those people can be recruited to help
the official site directly.  (like you've been discussing)

On the plus side, I'm slowing getting addicted to Ruby, and hoping
that by the time my project comes to fruitation speed will not be an
issue and awesome extensions like Distributed Ruby will still be alive
and well. :)

Cheers,
Navin.