[Rubygems-developers] Gem#status?

Chad Woolley thewoolleyman at gmail.com
Tue Nov 11 12:24:54 EST 2008

On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 10:17 AM, Phil Hagelberg <technomancy at gmail.com>wrote:

> The code to do so is very simple and well-tested.
> ...
> > Seem reasonable?
> I've just committed what I have. If you have any concrete objections I
> would be happy to attend to them, but everyone else I've talked to has
> been very glad to see this feature introduced. There is a little more
> logic to be added to the SpecFetcher about when to ignore prereleases,
> but other than that it should be ready.

All sounds good, but what do prior versions of rubygems do when you push
non-numeric versions to the repository?

If they blow up spectacularly, then I think you should add a check that will
not allow any non-numeric-version gemspec to be built unless the rubygems
version is >= the version which will contain your patch.  Which SHOULD be
1.4.0 (major feature addition, not bugfix), and that version should be
committed to the RubyGems repo right now - because the code in the repo is
no longer 1.3.anything ;)

-- Chad
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rubygems-developers/attachments/20081111/ce74f2e4/attachment.html>

More information about the Rubygems-developers mailing list