[Rubygems-developers] Non-upstream packages

Mauricio Fernández batsman.geo at yahoo.com
Wed Dec 8 10:39:38 EST 2004

On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 03:13:12PM -0000, Jim Weirich wrote:
> > So the general problem is: how can I know who is responsible for a
> > given .gem?  Where are bug reports to be sent? Where does it come from
> > to begin with: from Rubyforge, direct email submission...??
> Gems now support multiple author fields.  If you are repackaging someone
> else's software as a gem, you should include both the original author and
> your own contact information.

Sounds reasonable; I think this should be mentioned in RubyGems'
documentation. It might even make sense to issue a warning if the 
rubyforge_project field is empty and author: doesn't contain at least 2

But what about the deeper problem of "ownership". Is it OK to release
packages for software you didn't write? Does that make you responsible for
the package? 

The problem is that the RubyGems repository works as a whole, and the
mistakes from one devel. can end up affecting many others. For instance,
what would happen if we hadn't noticed this particular case and many
.gems depending on libbz2 >= 0.4 had been released? Correcting that
situation would require many coordinated modifications.

Hassle-free packages for Ruby?
RPA is available from http://www.rubyarchive.org/

More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list