[Rubygems-developers] Specifying equivalent modules?
public at bagotricks.com
Thu Apr 19 21:32:46 EDT 2007
Thanks much for the detailed replies to these issues (and especially if
some of the mentioned changes get made).
I'll see if I can provide a more detailed report on item #2 that I
Jim Weirich wrote:
> On 4/19/07, Thomas Palmer <public at bagotricks.com> wrote:
>> 1. "gem install" doesn't default to the current platform (in my tests),
>> so people are forced to choose instead of letting install just work.
> yes, but this is easily solvable ... its on the todo list for the gems
> team. This issue will just push it to the front of the list.
>> 2. I can't install and have active in the same local repo multiple
>> platforms of the same gem (i.e., different ones active for different
> Really? I think the repository structure should support this. We
> might need some extra logic in the activate code to make sure we get
> the right platform.
>> 3. People getting confused when saying "Hey, this library doesn't work
>> according to docs!" and mistaking the responsible party. Maybe that can
>> be somewhat mitigated by clarifying in the author and other fields of
>> the platform-specific gem.
> Yes, I don't know what to do about that. I think that if you were to
> offer a java based version of any current gem, you would want to work
> with the original author anyways ...to coordinate releases and keep
> compatibility, etc. Under today's RubyForge structure, you would have
> to publish the gem from the same RubyForge project, but that doesn't
> mean you have to share the same SVN repository.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Rubygems-developers