[Rubygems-developers] rubygems beta time?

Jim Weirich jim at weirichhouse.org
Fri Dec 29 08:16:21 EST 2006

Eric Hodel wrote:
 > I saw Jim made a flurry of cleanups, and I made some changes to 'gem
 > pristine' to make the require_gem -> gem transition to flow more
 > smoothly.
 > Since its holiday time this will keep the pending 0.9.1 release in
 > the public eye a little better, and hopefully we can release 0.9.1 in
 > the following week.
 > Are there any issues pending that I don't know about or have forgotten?

I am talking with Michael Studman about a patch to the
Specification hash method. Evidently, some gems have bad
values in the specification that is cause problems with the
"hash" method and the "==" operator. The problem is manifest
on JRuby more often than on standard Ruby just because JRuby
uses a different hash algorithm that happens to compare the
bad specs more often than the C version of Ruby.

We have beefed up the hash and == operators in Specification,
but Michael believes there are still some problems in this
area. His patch changes the hash function so that the
distribution of specs in the hash are different, making it
less likely that the bad specs collide in the same hash
bucket. But that's a solution that only "probably" fixes the
issue. I'm working with him to identify the exact problem to
come up with a better fix.

BTW, I've asked Michael to join this list so the issue gets
better visibility.

-- Jim Weirich      jim at weirichhouse.org     http://onestepback.org
-- In theory, practice and theory are the same.
-- In practice, they are different.

More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list