[Rubygems-developers] Packaging gems that are not your own

Chad Fowler chad at chadfowler.com
Mon Sep 20 21:55:23 EDT 2004

On 20-Sep-04, at 9:45 PM, Austin Ziegler wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Sep 2004 21:12:10 -0400, Chad Fowler <chad at chadfowler.com> 
> wrote:
>> On 20-Sep-04, at 9:05 PM, Gavin Sinclair wrote:
>>> Hi folks,
>>> I'm planning to craete a few gems of existing packages and submit 
>>> them
>>> (i.e. email them to Chad), for example the 'rdict' gem.  Now what if
>>> someone installs it and has a problem with it?  They're going to look
>>> at the spec and email the author, who might not appreciate the
>>> suggestion that something "they" did (which they didn't) has stuffed
>>> up.
>>> Is there sense in a "packager" attribute?  As in:
>>>   spec.author = "Ian Caliban"
>>>   spec.email  = "caliban at ..."
>>>   spec.packager = "Gavin Sinclair, gsinclair at ..."
>>> It's a bit late for 0.8, obviously, and I'd like to create a number 
>>> of
>>> gems in the coming weeks.  But I'd like to know your thoughts on the
>>> issue itself.
>> I would recommend emailing the gemspec to the author (and/or a
>> Rakefile) and ask if you can go ahead and release the finished gem.
>> I've done that a couple of times, and the authors have started
>> maintaining the gemspecs afterward.
> I think this is okay, but I agree with Gavin, too, as it makes it
> possible for RPA to use RubyGems as an alternative packaging format to
> the packaging format of rpa-base.
> -austin

I think .packager is a reasonable optional spec attribute, but I think 
we should sleep on it for a day :)


More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list