On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:20 AM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > As the subject says.
Depends on your definition of require. Ruby >= 2.2.0 will use less memory and be more responsive due to improvements in garbage collection: https://www.ruby-lang.org/en/news/2014/12/25/ruby-2-2-0-released/ For that reason, I'd like the deployed code to use a version of Ruby that has the improved GC. I would agree that that shouldn't be required for development/testing. I haven't investigated, but perhaps that could be expressed in Gemfiles using the group construct? http://yehudakatz.com/2010/05/09/the-how-and-why-of-bundler-groups/ - Sam Ruby > MacOS/X comes with 2.0.0 which seems to work for most if not all the code. > > So is it necessary to specify ruby 2.3.0 in status/Gemfile > and /usr/local/bin/ruby2.3.0 in passenger.cgi? > > In particular it seems wrong to specify that ruby is under > /usr/local/bin, even if 2.3.0 is required. > > I see that Gemfile does not support ruby version ranges (Why??), but > one can use the following work-round: > > raise 'Ruby version must be at least 2.0' unless RUBY_VERSION.to_f >= 2.0
