From: "Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme) via ruby-core" <ruby-core@...>
Date: 2023-11-24T21:46:31+00:00
Subject: [ruby-core:115477] [Ruby master Feature#19972] Install default/bundled gems into dedicated directories

Issue #19972 has been updated by Dan0042 (Daniel DeLorme).


> Although RubyGems know `vendor` dir, which is not even listed by `gem env`.

I think it's only listed if present
```
  - GEM PATHS:
     - /opt/ruby/3.2/lib/ruby/gems/3.2.0
     - /home/dan42/.gem/ruby/3.2.0
     - /opt/ruby/3.2/lib/ruby/vendor_ruby/gems/3.2.0
```

> My proposal is to make this flexible enough to allow the situation as you describe

I definitely appreciate this flexibility and I think it's a great design.

> Please note that I deliberately not using terms such as "root-installed gems"

And yet we need a word to describe those gems. If we have "default" gems and "bundled" gems, then what are "gems that are installed via rubygems to the lib/ruby/gems/ dir that may actually be configured to be something else" ? I used "root-installed" gems as the closest thing I could think of, but maybe "site" gems is the best word here?


> Next I could think of was to shift the meaning a bit and rename `default_gems` => `std_lib` gems and `bundled_gems` => `default_gems`, which would have its own share of issues.

I had a similar thought; what about using a "gems" subdir for everything?
```
lib/ruby/                   for stdlib
lib/ruby/gems/              for stdgems (default (and bundled?) gems)
         vendor_ruby/  
         vendor_ruby/gems/  already the case for `gem install --vendor`
         site_ruby/
         site_ruby/gems/    for regular `gem install`
```

----------------------------------------
Feature #19972: Install default/bundled gems into dedicated directories
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/19972#change-105406

* Author: vo.x (Vit Ondruch)
* Status: Assigned
* Priority: Normal
* Assignee: hsbt (Hiroshi SHIBATA)
----------------------------------------
I think that the current situation, where the same directory (lets call it `Gem.default_dir`) is used for default/bundled gems as well as for user installed gems, is suboptimal. During the times, this has caused us quite some issue on Fedora. Historically, we redefined the `Gem.default_dir` to user home directory, to avoid the mixing of system gems and user installed gems. Unfortunately, with advent of default/bundled gems, we were facing issues that these gems were suddenly not listed, etc. I am realizing this issue in full once again since the "user install" RubyGems feature has landed [1]. I also think that we have arrived to this situation by evolution, not by design.

Therefore my proposal is:

Keep the `Gem.default_dir` for user `gem install`ed gems and lets install default and bundled gems into separate dedicated directories. Have separate `Gem.bundled_gems_dir` and `Gem.default_gems_dir` structures.

Of course, if `Gem.default_dir == Gem.bundled_gems_dir == Gem.default_gems_dir`, we still can have the current layout.

I have a simple POC here:

https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/8761

BTW I have reported it here, because I think that RubyGems provides all it is needed. So it is not RubyGems ticket after all. However, I believe that RubyGems could benefit from this long term and some simplifications/cleanups would be possible.

[1]: https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/pull/5327



-- 
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
 ______________________________________________
 ruby-core mailing list -- ruby-core@ml.ruby-lang.org
 To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-core-leave@ml.ruby-lang.org
 ruby-core info -- https://ml.ruby-lang.org/mailman3/postorius/lists/ruby-core.ml.ruby-lang.org/