Re: What libraries to be unbundled?

There is also a middle ground that has not been mentioned that Chad  
and I have discussed before. That is unbundling everything into gems,  
but then rebundling certain gems so they ship with ruby by default,  
but can be upgraded easily.

This allows WEBrick and friends, libraries that people say are so  
useful they must be bundled, to remain as such, but still reap the  
benefits of being hooked into rubygems.

The persistent cgi.rb problems highlight this. If a gem containing  
cgi.rb was shipped with ruby by default, then when the cgi.rb bugs  
had been found, people could simple upgrade that gem.

Remember that the point of unbundling is to free more code for the  
release schedule of ruby, and allow that code to flourish more on  
it's own. Being able to easily upgrade 'shipped' code is paramount to  
that.

  - Evan Phoenix

On Jul 24, 2007, at 12:26 PM, Timothy J. Wood wrote:

>
> On Jul 24, 2007, at 12:19, Mike Moore wrote:
>> If you follow this to its logical conclusion, I think you'll end up
>> unbundling almost the entire standard library!
>>
>> Precisely!
>
>   Indeed.  The smaller the standard library is, the more likely it  
> is that ruby can
> be embedded in apps like Joyent's Slingshot w/o bringing along a  
> ton of
> unused code.
>
> -tim
>
>