[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