[Rubygems-developers] Specifying equivalent modules?

Thomas Palmer 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 
mentioned.

- Tom


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
>> platforms).
>>     
>
> 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...
URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rubygems-developers/attachments/20070419/1f8daae7/attachment.html 


More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list