[DRE-maint] Bug#448639: Debian Bugs information: detailed logs for Bug#448639
adam at opscode.com
Mon Aug 30 18:26:12 UTC 2010
On Aug 30, 2010, at 10:58 AM, Tim Olsen <tim at brooklynpenguin.com> wrote:
> What I was more thinking of was if there was a change in how rubygems
> organizes things under /usr/local. Lucas proposed storing gems under
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8. But if rubygems needs to move things
> around upon an upgrade, then that's technically a violation. Even
> setting up directories under /usr/local upon rubygems installation might
> be considered a violation. One possibility is to store everything *but*
> executables outside of /usr/local.
I think that would be acceptable, but I'm not sure it's necessary. The on disk gem format (with gems under a gems dir in an arch specific path) has been pretty consistent.
If CPAN did this, I imagine we would still ship the new version, and just warn users about the breakage on upgrade. With 1.9 shipping rubygems in the core ruby distribution, I think we can be safe in saying if the upstream does this, users are on their own: they choose an external package system, so they can suffer the consequences of a fickle upstream.
More information about the Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers