Re: Austin Ziegler's behaviour (Was: clarification of ruby libraries installation paths?)

On 10/29/07, Luis Lavena <[e-mail]> wrote:
> On 10/29/07, Lucas Nussbaum <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > > and therefore doesn't install it by default and you can't do that
> > > thing you could do out of the box on windows.
> > True, there are some differences between Windows and Linux, and with the
> > way you install apps on those two platforms. Some people prefer one
> > platform, some people prefer the other. Both for good reasons, usually.
> Please Lucas, don't take that as example. Out-of-the-box on Windows
> don't apply to OpenSSL either.
>
> Even if the ruby stblib has the extension pre-compiled for you, you
> still need OpenSSL installed to use it.
>
> So: non-identified dependencies still applies to Windows.

OpenSSL is included in the Ruby One-Click Installer. OUT OF THE BOX,
Ruby on Windows is more immediately useful than Ruby on Debian. By the
way, I strongly suggest you look at the threads I've posted about the
absolute *crap* that is the build situation on Windows and Microsoft's
culpability on this nonsense.

> > Your answers on this thread are full of hate and anger. I'm sorry if you
> > had a bad experience with Debian, Ubuntu, or something else in the past.
> > I'm involved in Debian development, trying to improve things, but being
> > received with so aggressive mails here make me reconsider a lot of
> > things.
> Also, discussions about packaging and "where to place things" help not
> just the distro you're working on, but also provide ideas to better
> managing of packages for Windows (as example) or enhance the platform
> (Ruby).

Your suggestion (managing packages for Windows) indicates how little
you know about the Windows situation overall. (The quality of the Ruby
packages on Windows extends directly to Andy Hunt and Curt Hibbs
tireless efforts at various times.)

> They are open to suggestions too, like us.

I'm open to suggestions, too. I didn't see a suggestion. I saw a
request without a suggestion. I also think the request is nonsense. I
said so.

> > Your behaviour clearly doesn't fit in the free software community. And I
> > can't remember the last time I faced someone so annoying in the free
> > software community.
> >
> > You don't care about how distros (or Apple) package ruby. I respect your
> > POV.  But I think that you made your opinion clear several times now,
> > and that you should just refrain from replying to my mails, or to
> > threads about distros, in the future.
> If anyone don't provide a constructive solution, or at least something
> constructive to the thread, please, keep the rants in your draft
> folder...

Please: read what I've written again. I've got *lots* of constructive
suggestions in the thread in question. The first and foremost of which
is to stop trying to shove Ruby into a Perl-shaped hole.

If you want to have a distro-happy-making solution, provide one. Code
talks. If I thought your problem was one worth solving, I'd look at
providing a solution myself just to get the distro maintainers to stop
asking for this crap (as they have been -- without providing patches
-- for ~3 years, mostly with nonsense about how bad RubyGems is --
which is thankfully MISSING from Lucas's comments). I don't think it
is.

-austin
-- 
Austin Ziegler * [e-mail] * http://www.halostatue.ca/
               * [e-mail] * http://www.halostatue.ca/feed/
               * [e-mail]