[#83096] File.setuid? on IO (Re: [ruby-cvs:67289] normal:r60108 (trunk): file.c: release GVL in File.{setuid?, setgid?, sticky?}) — Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
On 2017/10/04 8:47, normal@ruby-lang.org wrote:
5 messages
2017/10/04
[#83100] Re: File.setuid? on IO (Re: [ruby-cvs:67289] normal:r60108 (trunk): file.c: release GVL in File.{setuid?, setgid?, sticky?})
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2017/10/04
Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@ruby-lang.org> wrote:
[#83105] Re: File.setuid? on IO (Re: [ruby-cvs:67289] normal:r60108 (trunk): file.c: release GVL in File.{setuid?, setgid?, sticky?})
— Nobuyoshi Nakada <nobu@...>
2017/10/04
On 2017/10/04 15:55, Eric Wong wrote:
[#83107] Alias Enumerable#include? to Enumerable#includes? — Alberto Almagro <albertoalmagro@...>
Hello,
9 messages
2017/10/04
[#83113] Re: Alias Enumerable#include? to Enumerable#includes?
— "Urabe, Shyouhei" <shyouhei@...>
2017/10/05
This has been requested countless times, then rejected each and every time.
[#83129] Re: Alias Enumerable#include? to Enumerable#includes?
— Alberto Almagro <albertoalmagro@...>
2017/10/05
Sorry I didn't found it on the core mail list's archive.
[#83138] Re: Alias Enumerable#include? to Enumerable#includes?
— "Urabe, Shyouhei" <shyouhei@...>
2017/10/06
Ruby has not been made of popular votes so far. You have to show us
[#83149] Re: Alias Enumerable#include? to Enumerable#includes?
— Eric Wong <normalperson@...>
2017/10/06
Alberto Almagro <albertoalmagro@gmail.com> wrote:
[#83200] [Ruby trunk Feature#13996] [PATCH] file.c: apply2files releases GVL — normalperson@...
Issue #13996 has been reported by normalperson (Eric Wong).
4 messages
2017/10/10
[ruby-core:83125] [Ruby trunk Bug#13978][Rejected] Remove Bundler from StdLib
From:
hsbt@...
Date:
2017-10-05 10:09:46 UTC
List:
ruby-core #83125
Issue #13978 has been updated by hsbt (Hiroshi SHIBATA). Status changed from Open to Rejected >Bundler was merged directly into StdLib on the grounds of "Rubygems itself is going to depend on bundler." but that is nowhere close IMO. Looking at diff between RubyGems 2.6 and master 2, there is nothing more then one condition. That does not look as an integration. Rubygems master targeted version 2.7.0 already depends on bundler. see https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/blob/master/lib/rubygems/test_case.rb#L28 Therefore We should bundle bundler for upgrading bundled RubyGems. >And there is serious bundling going around. Why StdLib ships now with two copies of bundled Mollinilo. Why there are even two copies of "filesystem" library now? Why there is bundled Thor and Bundler and RubyGems are using different approach of handling CLI? It's an upstream issue, not ruby core. but I've same concerns for duplicate libraries like Mollinilo. I try to diet these files before releasing Ruby 2.5. ---------------------------------------- Bug #13978: Remove Bundler from StdLib https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/13978#change-67069 * Author: vo.x (Vit Ondruch) * Status: Rejected * Priority: Normal * Assignee: * Target version: * ruby -v: ruby 2.5.0dev (2017-10-03 trunk 60107) [x86_64-linux] * Backport: 2.3: UNKNOWN, 2.4: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- While I acknowledge people are using Bundler and it provides valuable services, I hate to point out that Bundler was merged to the StdLib on the grounds of "rubygems team has plan to migrate bundler into rubygems at rubygems 3.0." [1], but I can't see this plan to materialize. Bundler was merged directly into StdLib on the grounds of "Rubygems itself is going to depend on bundler." but that is nowhere close IMO. Looking at diff between RubyGems 2.6 and master [2], there is nothing more then one condition. That does not look as an integration. If the Bundler is going to be used by RubyGems (and actually it should be the other way around, Bundler should depend on RubyGems and not the way around), then would propagate into Ruby naturally as part of RubyGems. And there is serious bundling going around. Why StdLib ships now with two copies of bundled Mollinilo. Why there are even two copies of "filesystem" library now? Why there is bundled Thor and Bundler and RubyGems are using different approach of handling CLI? This was very premature step IMO and I'd like to see it reverted. If Bundler should be part of Ruby ATM, then it should currently shipped as default gem and not anything else. [1]: https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/issues/1681 [2]: https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/compare/2.6...master -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe> <http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>