[Win32utils-devel] rdoc, ri and gems

win32utils-devel at rubyforge.org win32utils-devel at rubyforge.org
Wed Nov 3 15:21:28 EST 2004

Hi all,


> > But I remember Chad mentioning to me that if we 
> > have a one-click installer then we do not need the gems (and 
> > vice-versa). Not that it matters though, since we can (and should) 
> > always  offer both options :-) The one-click installer has a slight 
> > advantage in that we can put our sample/test files in any folder of 
> > our choice which is not (yet) possible using gems. Or is it?
> >
> So, based on the above, the advantage you list here is moot.  
> Generally, though, if Windows users have a standard Windows 
> installer, the typical pain of installing libraries goes 
> away, so the advantage of RubyGems is a little less marked.  
> It may, however, be easier for someone to automate the 
> installation of libraries if they're available as RubyGems.  
> And it's really easy to upgrade.

My real motivation for wanting both gems and an installer is that the
individual packages tend to get ahead of our installer.  Considering the
number of packages we have, I think it's a bit unrealistic to put out a
new installer every time I decide to scratch an itch and put out a new
release for a given package (which I tend to do often).  Having a gem
immediately available for individual packages would be nice for folks
who can't/don't have a compiler and don't want to wait for the next
release of the installer.  But, I still want the installer, too.

> One last thing I left out is that when Curt goes to Gems-based
> installation of libs for the one-click installer, having
> these as Gems will really help to get you integrated into that
project, which would be great.

The possible integration with Curt's installer is a bonus. :)

> I think there's something 
> to be said for having the same interface for installing as 
> many libraries as once.

Yep, there's that, too. :)


More information about the win32utils-devel mailing list