Re: New packaging guidelines for Ruby

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

----- Original Message -----
> = ruby(name) vs rubygems(name) =

Here is one important reason why Gems should not provide ruby(name):
The ruby(name) provides are supposed to be provided by the libraries, that are meant to be directly loadable with "require 'name'" even without Rubygems library. The Rubygems are loaded by default in Ruby 1.9.3, but the users may choose not to load them by passing "--disable-gems" option to the interpreter (either directly or via environment variable RUBYOPT).
For a user, who turns of his Rubygems, a packaged Gem providing ruby(name) wouldn't load, while some other non-gem package providing ruby(name) would load, which is obviously a puzzling behaviour.

Therefore, we should distinct these two cases for libraries, that are:
1) Loadable without Rubygems - these should provide ruby(name)
2) Loadable with Rubygems - these should provide rubygem(name)

Bohuslav "Slavek" Kabrda.
packaging mailing list

[Home]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Red Hat 9 Bible]     [Fedora Bible]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]

Powered by Linux