From: Richard Kilmer Date: 2004-08-22T05:20:28+09:00 Subject: Re: Package requests for the prelim. Ruby Production Archive On 8/21/04 3:44 PM, "Mauricio Fern�ndez" wrote: > On Sun, Aug 22, 2004 at 04:07:07AM +0900, Dave Thomas wrote: >>> Now, I hear the standard ri will be modified because otherwise RubyGems >>> wouldn't be able to achieve real ri/rdoc integration. >> >> That's news to me :) AFAIK, the gems team is using the off-the-shelf >> rdoc/ri. >> >> However, if there are features I could add that would help all you >> packaging folk, just let me know. > > I was misled by http://rubygems.rubyforge.org/wiki/wiki.pl?ChadsList: You were misled? This is just some notes that I typed up relayed from Chad on some final things we wanted to get done...not a general communications to the broader community. No problem with reading it obviously but don't take it as a message. The below mentioned item says Dave is open to changing ri...in general...based on community feedback...he always has been. We can obviously add our own version of ri, but we did not like the idea. Don't take it personally :-) > > #SOME WORK DONE Figure out what to do about "ri" integration. Dave > is open to modifying ri itself if it doesn't have a negative impact > on the existing ri functionality. MUCH better than creating ri-gems or > some such crap > > (I do share the implicit "ri-rpa == crap" assessment :P, but it exists > currently as a sub-optimal solution for the reasons stated in my > prev. msg)