[#6115] Ruby 1.8.3: YAML.dump/load cannot handle Bignum — akira yamada / やまだあきら <akira@...>
[#6119] Packaging BOF on Friday the 14th? — Austin Ziegler <halostatue@...>
(Crossposted to both ruby-core and rubygems-developers for the benefit
[#6135] ObjectSpace.each_object, but not Symbols? — TRANS <transfire@...>
I added some state to Symbol:
Hi,
Hi,
[#6143] — Christophe Poucet <christophe.poucet@...>
Hello,
Hi,
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 nobu.nokada@softhome.net wrote:
Hi,
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, nobuyoshi nakada wrote:
[#6161] On NullClass or FalseClass#method_missing — TRANS <transfire@...>
Hi--
[#6162] Concerning shared flag — Christophe Poucet <christophe.poucet@...>
Hello,
>>>>> "C" == Christophe Poucet <christophe.poucet@gmail.com> writes:
Hello,
>>>>> "C" == Christophe Poucet <christophe.poucet@gmail.com> writes:
[#6188] yield and call not identical? — "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Hi --
[#6199] Kernel rdoc HTML file not being created when rdoc is run on 1.8.3 — James Britt <ruby@...>
When 1.8.3 came out, I grabbed the source and ran rdoc on it. After
On Sun, Oct 09, 2005 at 12:41:02AM +0900, James Britt wrote:
Doug Kearns wrote:
H.Yamamoto wrote:
On 10/19/05, why the lucky stiff <ruby-core@whytheluckystiff.net> wrote:
[#6213] extend and super -- I cannot understand why this behavior — TRANS <transfire@...>
module Q
On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, TRANS wrote:
On 10/10/05, Mathieu Bouchard <matju@artengine.ca> wrote:
On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, TRANS wrote:
On 10/10/05, Mathieu Bouchard <matju@artengine.ca> wrote:
[#6235] Keyword arguments in Rite — Daniel Schierbeck <daniel.schierbeck@...>
Hello everybody! I'm new to this list, so please don't flame me if what
Daniel Schierbeck wrote:
[#6251] RubyGems, upstream releases and idempotence of packaging — Mauricio Fern疣dez <mfp@...>
[sorry for the very late reply; I left this message in +postponed and forgot
On 10/13/05, Mauricio Fern疣dez <mfp@acm.org> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 08:55:41PM +0900, Gavin Sinclair wrote:
[#6262] Re: A concrete solution to RubyGems' repackageability problems — Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...>
On 10/13/05, Mauricio Fern疣dez <mfp@acm.org> wrote:
[#6282] Wilderness: Need Code to invoke ELTS_SHARED response — "Charles E. Thornton" <ruby-core@...>
Testing the My Object Dump and I am trying to cause creation
On Fri, Oct 14, 2005 at 05:04:59PM +0900, Charles E. Thornton wrote:
Mauricio Fern疣dez wrote:
On Oct 14, 2005, at 12:43 PM, Charles E. Thornton wrote:
On Sun, Oct 16, 2005 at 01:34:13PM +0900, Charles Mills wrote:
Mauricio Fern疣dez wrote:
[#6284] Ruby 1.8.3, Gems, Rake and Syck — TRANS <transfire@...>
George Moschovitis tried to send me a gem to try out and it would not install.
On 10/14/05, Ryan Davis <ryand-ruby@zenspider.com> wrote:
[#6315] Integer#** weirdness — Peter Vanbroekhoven <calamitates@...>
Hello,
[#6338] Help/Ruby 1.8.3/HP-UX/[BUG] Bus Error — tad.bochan@...
Hi ... need help ...
[#6358] Handle prompts with newlines in irb auto-indentation mode — noreply@...
Bugs item #2705, was opened at 2005-10-23 23:07
Hi,
[#6362] CGI read_multipart implementaion can create Tempfiles for files less than 10KB — noreply@...
Bugs item #2708, was opened at 2005-10-24 15:44
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 noreply@rubyforge.org wrote:
[#6364] lib/rational.rb documentation — Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...>
Hi,
[#6365] Time for built-in Rational and Complex classes? — Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@...>
There has been some support for, but no comment on, RCR #260 ("Make
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005, Gavin Sinclair wrote:
On Oct 24, 2005, at 7:14 AM, Ara.T.Howard wrote:
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005, Charles Mills wrote:
On 10/26/05, Mathieu Bouchard <matju@artengine.ca> wrote:
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005, Charles Mills wrote:
On 10/27/05, Mathieu Bouchard <matju@artengine.ca> wrote:
[#6373] instance_eval/instance_exec discussion — Daniel Amelang <daniel.amelang@...>
Introduction:
Hi,
[#6376] Crash in Tk demo of Ruby 1.9.0 CVS — Jean-Claude Arbaut <jcarbaut@...>
I tried the demos in /ruby/ext/tk/sample/demos-en/widget
[#6389] [PATCH] 1.8.3 ruby.c doesn't compile on OS X due to missing char **environ — noreply@...
Bugs item #2715, was opened at 2005-10-24 23:01
Hi,
[#6391] Threading performance — Wink Saville <wink@...>
Hello all,
[#6396] Nested Exception — Yohanes Santoso <ysantoso-rubycore@...>
Would you accept a patch to provide nested Exception?
[#6402] Pathname.exists?() — James Edward Gray II <james@...>
Pathname supports the legacy exist?() method, but not the current
[#6405] Re: [PATCH] Pathname.exists?() — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...>
On 10/25/05, Berger, Daniel <Daniel.Berger@qwest.com> wrote:
On 10/26/05, TRANS <transfire@gmail.com> wrote:
On 10/25/05, Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@gmail.com> wrote:
On Oct 25, 2005, at 11:28 AM, TRANS wrote:
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005, Eric Hodel wrote:
On 10/26/05, Ara.T.Howard <Ara.T.Howard@noaa.gov> wrote:
On 10/25/05, Gavin Sinclair <gsinclair@gmail.com> wrote:
[#6419] Refactoring eval.c into eval.c, thread.c, thread.h & eval.h — Wink Saville <wink@...>
Hello,
[#6427] Re: Wilderness: I am working of a TAGS Extension - We Have One? — "Berger, Daniel" <Daniel.Berger@...>
> -----Original Message-----
[#6430] PStore Documentation — James Edward Gray II <james@...>
The attached patch completely documents the PStore library. Please
James Edward Gray II wrote:
[#6442] Wilderness: I Have formatted README.EXT into an HTML Document — "Charles E. Thornton" <ruby-core@...>
I have taken README.EXT (English Version Only) and have reformatted
Hi,
Charles E. Thornton wrote:
[#6455] Wilderness: OK - Let us Try to sending it (not as a reply) — "Charles E. Thornton" <ruby-core@...>
I am sorry - I don't understand this problem
[#6469] csv.rb a start on refactoring. — Hugh Sasse <hgs@...>
For a database application I found using CSV to be rather slow.
On Oct 28, 2005, at 8:53 AM, Ara.T.Howard wrote:
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005, James Edward Gray II wrote:
On Oct 28, 2005, at 9:58 AM, Ara.T.Howard wrote:
On Sat, 29 Oct 2005, James Edward Gray II wrote:
On Oct 28, 2005, at 8:25 PM, Ara.T.Howard wrote:
On Sat, 29 Oct 2005, James Edward Gray II wrote:
On Oct 28, 2005, at 8:43 PM, Ara.T.Howard wrote:
On Oct 28, 2005, at 8:43 PM, Ara.T.Howard wrote:
On Oct 28, 2005, at 10:06 PM, James Edward Gray II wrote:
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005, James Edward Gray II wrote:
On Oct 29, 2005, at 12:11 PM, Ara.T.Howard wrote:
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005, James Edward Gray II wrote:
I've decided to create a FasterCSV library, based on the code we
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005, James Edward Gray II wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Mon, 31 Oct 2005, NAKAMURA, Hiroshi wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Tue, 1 Nov 2005, NAKAMURA, Hiroshi wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, NAKAMURA, Hiroshi wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Oct 29, 2005, at 12:11 PM, Ara.T.Howard wrote:
On Tue, 1 Nov 2005, James Edward Gray II wrote:
On Oct 31, 2005, at 11:59 AM, Ara.T.Howard wrote:
[#6508] characters (and small strings) in ruby 2.0 — Eric Mahurin <eric.mahurin@...>
In ruby 2.0, the current plan is to for a character to be represented as a
Re: RubyGems, upstream releases and idempotence of packaging
On Thu, Oct 13, 2005 at 08:55:41PM +0900, Gavin Sinclair wrote:
> > In my previous message, I tried to convey the idea that, given some
> > conditions, a pure-Ruby .gem-only release is more akin to binary
> > packages than to pristine sources.
>
> ".gem files should always be considered 'binary releases' in that
> they're provided for runtime use, not for creating packages. If
> people want to create a package out of a project, they should seek out
> a tarball or SCM access. If a project releases .gem files only and
> provides no SCM access, the (re)packager should bug the author about
> this instead of complaining that .gem files aren't everything they
> want." Discuss.
We're considering the following alternatives (the initial assumption is
that we want repackaging to happen so that end users can install Ruby
software the way they choose --- or they're allowed to):
* accept the status quo: do to the "binary" nature of RubyGems packages,
often attempts to repackage them involve:
* requests to the upstream developer for the pristine sources
* patching by the repackager (or the upstream developer) to ensure
the software works without depending on RubyGems
* provide a mechanism to make it easy to give repackagers the input they need
without affecting RubyGems' capabilities.
I see the tradeoff as
(a) (b)
RubyGems + Package <======> * repackaging effort
implementation cost * upstream effort to ensure the
sw. works with and without RubyGems
(done once) (once per package)
Moving towards (a) minimizes the global amount of work needed to
develop, release, repackage and install Ruby software.
I'm willing to work on making that happen, and am thus helping Christian
Neukirchen with Package. The approach we propose demands little to no
effort from the RubyGems team.
--
Mauricio Fernandez