[technion]

I fell on rvm because it seems to be the "default" recommendation. I don't see a need to use something "better" if the raw tool does the job perfectly.

I do get annoyed that "rvm list known" tends to only show old versions. For example, it suggests it can install ruby-2.2.1, but I'm fully aware 2.2.4 is available, as is ruby 2.3 now. And for me at least, this problem is consistent after applying the standard advice of "get the latest rvm".

[mwpmaybe]

rvm "stable" hasn't been updated in quite a while, last time I checked. you need to install the "dev" version.

[aaronbrethorst]

rvm was perfectly happy to install Ruby 2.3.0 for me this morning, upgrading me from 2.2.4, which is what I was using until last night.