Kyle Schmitt wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Joel
> VanderWerf<vjoel / path.berkeley.edu> wrote:
>> lph Bl wrote:
>>> Okay, if I decided to upgrade my 4.5 centos to 5.3 - what would be
>>> involved - any ideas?
>> but then you'd still be stuck with an obsolete ruby in the default repos,
>> no?
> 
> Yes, but 3 things
> 1) 1.9 is still not %100 stable, it's still a moving target.
> 2) 5.x is insanely easier to maintain than 4.x
> 3) the dependent libraries are more up to date, so compiling from
> source should be easier for both ruby & any gems or ruby libs that are
> wanted.

Very good points!

-- 
       vjoel : Joel VanderWerf : path berkeley edu : 510 665 3407