From: Antonio Terceiro Date: 2011-06-29T05:02:23+09:00 Subject: [ruby-core:37643] Re: I have imported Rake 0.9.2 to trunk --G4iJoqBmSsgzjUCe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Luis Lavena escreveu isso a=ED: > On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 3:23 PM, Antonio Terceiro > wrote: > > Hello Eric, > > > > Eric Hodel escreveu isso a=ED: > >> I asked Jim if he would like me to import rake 0.9.2 to trunk, so I ha= ve.. > >> > >> Let me know if there are any problems. > >> > >> PS: I broke `make install` r32217 but fixed it with r32218 > > > > What are the reasons that led to the inclusion of rake (and e.g. > > rubygems) in Ruby's standard library in the first place? > > >=20 > Rake has been part of Ruby 1.9.1 and 1.9.2 since their releases. Rake > has become a commonly used tool, like RubyGems. >=20 > Ruby also includes JSON as part of it, and RDoc, these tools evolved > form independent ones to be part of Ruby itself with time. I already knew that those things are widely used and that they got included in Ruby 1.9 ... ;-) What happens in practice, though, is that people will always install the latest Rubygems and the latest Rake from within Rubygems, regardless of the versions included in Ruby 1.9.x Why I asked this: I am part of the Debian Ruby packaging team, and we started to discuss how to deal with the following issue: We have Rubygems and Rake packages for Ruby 1.8, but not for Ruby 1.9 because they are already included. What happens then is that users of Ruby 1.8 end up having newer versions of both Rubygems and Rake, and Ruby 1.9 users end up with whatever version was included with Ruby, which are often outdated with regard to the current versions of the standalone packages. If we decide to make the Debian packages for Rubygems, Rake etc available for both Ruby 1.8 and Ruby 1.9, we will be in practive overriding the versions bundled with Ruby. I have the feeling that doing this reproduces what non-Debian users already do: they install these packages regardless of the fact they are already bundled with Ruby, either manually or because some others packages depend explicitly on them (e.g. several gems depend on rake, and that will cause Rubygems to install a standalone rake package). It has been suggested that Ruby 1.9 could have way of disabling the bundled packages on ./configure so that they don't get installed on `make install`, and we could then make the Debian packages explicitly depend on Rubygems/Rake/etc so that users always get the newest version of them together with Ruby 1.9. We don't want to have a Debian-specific patch for that, so we wanted the opinion of Ruby core. What do people think about that? --=20 Antonio Terceiro http://softwarelivre.org/terceiro --G4iJoqBmSsgzjUCe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJOCjNGAAoJEPwNsbvNRgve63oQALxzllBbmQAJR+pig6dCJLoM YOd6sgmWgi6NMMY0dlew+OsLtMiBiAG1wVv5p2YhhooknMI71ehvH+F7CgldHZUd RG0QbUUMgaVom7C0SLrcVnEPxsOp9wa7St52Z9tYQvyPN625Cn//n9Qw10E8r0Vh axnb4BxV7Y5ga7hwq6tIl3S7dnEndox5x+8LBbod3zNjBO/ipmuFgu66wNKEORRh UjtoIkYALvvN++/6MRbcu55xyHqVZ4QzJFiBtkX90ah3ifG26fv9Pq27Qu2B3foK SbOk1uq9cQrtILQO4OBdZYSd1cqCd5+MdVFhRAmwhs+DmaswQd7AsH1BO2T0/ash U2LRyUjTzCQuBbnzXHDsoCGNYo8vWiLYN/v+MWYoyrPrLLIXsdJ6hRGB54z84yAa DpxnvoZgRpAHBCgOpe2H3V5zM/rNWkXZSmACIo81KMPtAO+2lJLRDIJI0MK34DEN 6teSjs6XhPSg6ckTZofRJ7bL64IeBY6T9reVF05EhLBzl4xBlpXOjbfYHQIde7UD goA9ZLBa1JIKOM+j15lM1tD0GENEeqDxzQ66sm7UYqKd6HzYTBP0VHPkpvi3lJjJ CPuvkCqNV7Y2zF0SCgjWI7XYee8BWqe24Gn1crpCth6BNsANo+POL0OcNXxFduiz KXVmFQ30zlPoxtDzf2oM =Lv/v -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --G4iJoqBmSsgzjUCe--