[Rubygems-developers] Environment variables
gsinclair at soyabean.com.au
Mon Apr 19 11:25:18 EDT 2004
On Monday, April 19, 2004, 4:30:39 AM, Jim wrote:
> Gavin Sinclair wrote:
>> I'm concerned about RUBY_GEMS: GEM_PATH would be more intuitive
>> (RUBY_GEMS could mean anything, really).
> I have no problems with the name change. GEM_HOME and GEM_PATH make a
> good pair.
>> And I'd expect that the
>> *first* element in this path would be the target dir for installs.
>> Not sure why I expect that. Isn't that behaviour apparent somewhere
>> at the moment?
> Actually, the target directory is most likely the *last* element of the
> GEM_PATH (or RUBY_GEMS, whatever). This allows the user to override
> anything in the official gem directory.
> GEM_HOME and GEM_PATH/RUBY_GEMS interact like this. If GEM_HOME is in
> the path, then the path is left as is. If GEM_HOME is not in the path,
> it is added to the end.
Good point. I wonder, though: why would the user want to 'override'
the official gem directory *as a source, not a target*? A gem is a
gem is a gem, is it not? You don't need to fiddle the order in which
you *search* (locally) for a gem: you can either access it or you
So what were the original design considerations?
More information about the Rubygems-developers