After RubyConf2002 some people decided that a package
management/installation system should be developed and so they made
raainstall. Now, there’s not much activity with raainstall - it sort of
works as-is now, but work seems to have stopped on it.
At RubyConf2003 there was apparently another uproar about package
management/installation and thus rubygems was born and received some
attention for a few weeks. Will rubygems meet the same fate as
raainstall?
Will RubyConf2004 spawn yet another package management scheme that is
destined to fall into obsurity…?
I guess it’s not as big of an issue now that 1.8.x includes a lot more
packages, but it would still be nice to have a good package management
system for Ruby…
Not being familiar with either, what was wrong with raainstall that
rubygems was started? I would say that if Ruby has an Achilles heel, I
think this (unified library package system) seems like it. Subordinate
is library versioning.
Dan
···
On Jan 24, 2004, at 3:54 AM, Phil Tomson wrote:
After RubyConf2002 some people decided that a package
management/installation system should be developed and so they made
raainstall. Now, there’s not much activity with raainstall - it sort
of
works as-is now, but work seems to have stopped on it.
At RubyConf2003 there was apparently another uproar about package
management/installation and thus rubygems was born and received some
attention for a few weeks. Will rubygems meet the same fate as
raainstall?
Will RubyConf2004 spawn yet another package management scheme that is
destined to fall into obsurity…?
I guess it’s not as big of an issue now that 1.8.x includes a lot more
packages, but it would still be nice to have a good package management
system for Ruby…
From the outside it looks like RubyGems still has a ways to go, but is
definitely usable enough to do the basics. I’ve packaged Lafcadio as a
rubygem, and I believe others are doing so right now.
After RubyConf2002 some people decided that a package
management/installation system should be developed and so they made
raainstall. Now, there’s not much activity with raainstall - it sort of
works as-is now, but work seems to have stopped on it.
At RubyConf2003 there was apparently another uproar about package
management/installation and thus rubygems was born and received some
attention for a few weeks. Will rubygems meet the same fate as
raainstall?
Will RubyConf2004 spawn yet another package management scheme that is
destined to fall into obsurity…?
I guess it’s not as big of an issue now that 1.8.x includes a lot more
packages, but it would still be nice to have a good package management
system for Ruby…
> After RubyConf2002 some people decided that a package
> management/installation system should be developed and so they made
> raainstall. Now, there’s not much activity with raainstall - it sort of
> works as-is now, but work seems to have stopped on it.
>
> At RubyConf2003 there was apparently another uproar about package
> management/installation and thus rubygems was born and received some
> attention for a few weeks. Will rubygems meet the same fate as
> raainstall?
>
> Will RubyConf2004 spawn yet another package management scheme that is
> destined to fall into obsurity…?
>
> I guess it’s not as big of an issue now that 1.8.x includes a lot more
> packages, but it would still be nice to have a good package management
> system for Ruby…
>
> Still hoping, but not holding my breath.
>
> Phil
RubyGems is pretty much feature-complete and usable. What we really need
to do is a release. As of now you can get the code from CVS and give it a
try.
RubyGems is pretty much feature-complete and usable. What we really need
to do is a release. As of now you can get the code from CVS and give it a
try.
Hi Chad,
Can you talk about the state of both 1) remote installation and 2)
dependency managing? I hate to ask such a basic question but the docs
at the RubyGems wiki do seem to be somewhat incomplete and/or
out-of-date. (hint, hint.)
And related to question 1, above, is there any centralized place to
register new RubyGems? It’d be cool to have one comprehensive place to
see how adoption’s going.
Quoteing sera@fhwang.net, on Sun, Jan 25, 2004 at 03:59:57PM +0900:
RubyGems is pretty much feature-complete and usable. What we really need
to do is a release. As of now you can get the code from CVS and give it a
try.
Can you talk about the state of both 1) remote installation and 2)
dependency managing? I hate to ask such a basic question but the docs
at the RubyGems wiki do seem to be somewhat incomplete and/or
out-of-date. (hint, hint.)
I second this. The developers docs consist of a single example, but no
description of what can be set, or what setting any of the properties
does!