[Rubygems-developers] RubyGems API Docs

Gavin Sinclair gsinclair at soyabean.com.au
Tue Dec 7 17:47:01 EST 2004

On Tuesday, December 7, 2004, 11:49:29 PM, Mauricio wrote:

> I see. Would it make sense to work on the interface and come up with
> something that can rightfully be called *A*PI? 

> I think this would be good because:
> * since RubyGems is meant to become the Ruby standard, you'll want to
>   ensure backwards compatibility, as Rich pointed out. This is much
>   easier if you explicitly expose some parts of RubyGems through a
>   public API.
> * it is in RubyGems' best interest to make people view it not only as a
>   tool but also as a codebase to build upon through well-defined
>   interfaces. This opens the door to more intelligent tools that
>   leverage RubyGems' infrastructure.
> * the creation of such tools would be easier if you offer a stable
>   target
> * it is better to do it now before code dependent on RubyGems can be
>   broken by the ongoing refactoring.
> * the creation of an API can happen in parallel with the current
>   refactoring (re: RemoteInstaller) and makes the code arguably cleaner
>   and easier to document.

> What do you think?

Agreed on all points.


More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list