[Rubygems-developers] Why does an install command an update of the Gem source index ?

Hugh Sasse hgs at dmu.ac.uk
Fri Jun 3 05:25:48 EDT 2005

On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Lothar Scholz wrote:

> Hello Hugh,
> Friday, June 3, 2005, 6:35:21 AM, you wrote:
> HS> I think you have a point, but I think it would be sensible to cache
> HS> the info from the remote source locally.  Rubygems-0.8.10 has a
         [on the basis that you shouldn't have to keep getting it]
> If i understand correctly then yaml.Z is a complete index of all
> packages and all versions. And this is a very bad idea. Usefull in the
> past where RubyGems was not popular and had a handfull of packages, so

OK, if you need the index file {intermittent connection, for example)
then you are going to need the data it indexes, i.e. all the gems.
So really only the server and its mirrors should have that.  Then we
need some way to query the server.  Besides, if the index file gets
too big it will take too long to update.  We may need a database
instead in the future.

Is that how you see this working, or do you have something else in

>>> Isn't RubyGems working like a classis client server
>>> application ? [HGS> how?]
> In the way that as less data as possible should be store on the local
> system and minimized data transfer is preferred  (which in this case
> is just a conclusion from the first point).

Minimized data transfer has been addressed somewhat by compression,
but I think your first point about "does the client actually need
the remote index at all?" is a good one.

More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list