From: Carl Youngblood <carl.youngblood@...>
Date: 2004-09-03T08:26:57+09:00
Subject: Re: Pickaxe 2 and rpa-base

I see what you're saying.  Thanks for the explanation.  Don't know if
you've already explained it in the book, but this same explanation you
gave me would probably be worth putting in.

On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 08:09:31 +0900, Chad Fowler <chadfowler@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 08:06:28 +0900, Carl Youngblood
> <carl.youngblood@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think I understand the basic difference, but I was mainly commenting
> > on its conspicuous absence in pickaxe 2.
> >
> >
> 
> I may not have been clear.  I should have said "the fundamental
> difference driving this decision".  My point is that there isn't much
> to explain w.r.t RPA, since it isn't the developer's job to create
> packages with it.  The goal of the RubyGems chapter in the pickaxe
> (speaking for myself, at least) is to show Ruby developers a
> repeatable way to create packages that can be easily distributed and
> installed.
> 
> To repeat my sentiment from the earlier post, I think this is a win
> for any package manager.  If there are more gems, it's easier to make
> RPA ports.  If there are more RPA ports, it's easier for the
> developers to take those ports and the changes required to make them
> work and creat gems.
> 
> Chad
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 08:02:41 +0900, Chad Fowler <chadfowler@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Fri, 3 Sep 2004 07:32:05 +0900, Carl Youngblood
> > >
> > >
> > > <carl.youngblood@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I was just drooling in anticipation for pickaxe 2 and looking through
> > > > the table of contents on the pragprog web site.  I know this is
> > > > probably asking too much considering its recent release, but rpa-base
> > > > wasn't too far behind ruby-gems in being released, and I believe it is
> > > > definitely a worthy contender in the ruby package management arena.  I
> > > > was disappointed to see that it wasn't included in the book, although
> > > > a whole chapter was devoted to ruby-gems.
> > >
> > > I think the fundamental difference is that RubyGems requires
> > > developers to package their own software whereas RPA is meant to be a
> > > repository with a central team doing the packaging.  Most of the
> > > RubyGems content in the pickaxe is about how to create gems.
> > > Ultimately, if gems become ubiquitous, it makes the RPA team's
> > > (Mauricio, that is) job easier, because some thought will have to be
> > > put into how to make software distributable in this kind of way[1].  I
> > > see it as a win for everyone.
> > >
> > > Chad (who wrote the rubygems chapter for pickaxe2)
> > >
> > > [1] For an example, check
> > > http://halostatue.ca/blog/index.cgi/Tech/Ruby/Ruwiki/Deployment.20040902.md
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> 
>