Curt Hibbs wrote: > installer team. I have been asking for help repeatedly over the years > without much response. So far, only Ryan Leavengood and Shashank Date > have > helped. Well, maybe this is the real problem with the Ruby community then? Asking for assistance over a number of years to get help on an installer package that I'm sure thousands of people, companies, etc. use daily and coming back with mostly deaf echos is not ideal. This installer is a fundamental piece of Ruby being accepted by a larger audience (sorry but Windows is still the dominant platform out there). I know a lot of developers/companies that unless they get a timely pretty installer package they won't bother using it or allow it on a server. (I hear the argument already "well we don't want those types of developers anyway"... Don't we? Do we want critical mass or be a niche language?) The point of my post was to eliminate the manual work that has to go into a Ruby installer. Make it a lot more automated, flick a switch and walk away. Even under ideal situations the Ruby Windows Installer is at least a few days/weeks turn around time. Right now the 1.84 release is going on 6 months. This is the reality right now. The release of a Ruby installer should not be based on someone's agenda, it should be an automated process. I appreciate what the team does and the endless work they put into it but at some point the Ruby community will need to mature in this regard. From a company's perspective I have a lot better chance of having this installed on a server based simply off of the organized, tidy webpage: http://www.python.org/download/releases/2.4.3/ All the releases synced up, all the builds ready for download from one location. Nice and easy. When I look at the Ruby download site I see a mis-mash of info and links leading off to other sites- it looks unprofessional at best. Again, I'm looking at this from a company's eyes. First impressions mean a lot. -The Enterprise Astronaut -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.