[DRE-maint] RFC: Ruby1.8, 1.9 and Rubygems
jimmy at deefa.com
Sun Jun 1 03:03:07 UTC 2008
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> We (Akira, Daigo, I) had an email discussion about to best package
> Rubygems (the software, not the gems packages). Now that Ruby1.9
> includes Rubygems, we have a problem, because that meant that we have to
> maintain two seperate rubygems versions (one for ruby1.8, in the
> rubygems source package, using the version on www.rubygems.org, and one
> for ruby1.9, in the ruby1.9 source package).
This makes sense to me. Having 2 rubygems source packages is quite
messy, and seems to be asking for bugs to be fixed in one and not the
I haven't compared the version of gems distributed with 1.9 to the
vanilla one. Are they exactly the same?
> As a side note, the binary packages will be renamed, so that we only
> - rubygems1.8 for Ruby1.8
> - rubygems1.9 for Ruby1.9
> I think that this makes more sense than using libgems-ruby1.X, since
> rubygems is more an application than a library.
I agree on this too. libgems-ruby1.X is was definitely not what I first
searched for when trying to install rubygems. rubygems1.X seems the more
obvious choice for a package name.
-- James Healy <jimmy-at-deefa-dot-com> Sun, 01 Jun 2008 12:57:08 +1000
More information about the Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers