[Rubygems-developers] Outstanding Issues for next Beta Release

Chad Fowler chad at chadfowler.com
Mon Jun 28 01:03:20 EDT 2004


On 27/6/2004, at 3:00 PM, Jim Weirich wrote:

> 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
>

I think so.  Do they still ask for verification before installing 
dependencies?  I'm having really spotty net access now, so I can't 
check easily.

>> * 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.

Out of a desire for cleanliness, the possibility of doing name-1.2.3 
--version "> 1.2.3" doesn't sit well.  But, of course, you'd have to be 
an idiot to do this.  :) I think we should make things consistent, 
which probably means allowing the versioned name in every case.

>
>> * 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 assume this is something Rich did.  Rich?


>> * 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.
>

Agreed.


> Anything else I've missed?
>


I'd like to try to get my --test refactoring in unless you've already 
done it on your own.  This also allows users to run tests on 
already-installed gems.

Of course, I haven't been able to work on gems much during vacation.  
I'll be back Thursday.  If you guys want to do a release by the end of 
the week, don't let me hold you back.  I would suggest Rich or Jim, 
having done almost all of the changes since the last release, package 
things up and send out an announcement.

Chad



More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list