[Rubygems-developers] Outstanding Issues for next Beta Release
Jim Weirich
jim at weirichhouse.org
Sun Jun 27 09:00:36 EDT 2004
Jim Weirich wrote:
> Finally, as I was doing examples, the following issues came to my notice:
>
> * When dependent gems are installed (e.g. installing log4r when copland
> is requested), the success of the dependent installs is not seen at the
> console. Just the success of the requested gem. In the examples
> (before I replaced it with new output), all gems were reported on. Is
> this something we should fix?
Still outstanding
> * Sometimes uninstall gives a Undefined Method Error:
> version_requirement, but no backtrace is given. This only happens in
> certain cases, but I can get it to repeat (I think).
Fixed.
> * Some commands take gem names as "name" and "name-1.2.3", and some
> commands take only "name". In particular, uninstall does not recognized
> the versioned version. It would be helpful if it does. It might be
> worth discussing in general when "name" vs "name-1.2.3" is appropriate.
Outstanding.
> * I don't think the .gemrc configuration file is picked up. It is
> commented out in *two* places in the code (not by me), so I'm thinking
> someone did that with the intention of coming back to it. This should
> be fixed before release.
Outstanding.
> * I think I broke gem update. It fails with a Undefined Method error:
> process_install_command.
Fixed.
I think the .gemrc issue should be fixed before we release the next
beta. The other outstanding issues can wait for further discussion.
Anything else I've missed?
--
-- Jim Weirich jim at weirichhouse.org http://onestepback.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct,
not tried it." -- Donald Knuth (in a memo to Peter van Emde Boas)
More information about the Rubygems-developers
mailing list