From: "trans.  (T. Onoma)" <transami@...>
Date: 2004-10-28T03:30:25+09:00
Subject: Re: Gems as key? Re: The real Ruby vs. Python.

On Wednesday 27 October 2004 02:00 pm, Curt Hibbs wrote:
| Michael DeHaan wrote:
| > Dare I say it, but cloning CPAN near-exactly wouldn't be a bad way to go.
| >
| > And that means putting RPAN (or whatever) as part of the Ruby standard
| > library, having college mirrors, doing dependancy checking, and so
| > forth.
|
| This is not quite the same thing, but...
|
| The One-Click Ruby Installer for Windows is going to include RubyGems and a
| GUI interface to RubyGems. RubyGems will be in the final 1.8.2 release of
| the installer (hopefully the GUI interface will be ready in time to be
| included as well). It is also possible that a follow-on release would
| contain RPA (and a corresponding GUI interface).

And use the same GUI for both? 

Seems to me it would be best of Gems team and RPA team really worked hard 
together to create shared framework. Gems serving as a general packaging 
framework and the idea of RPA becoming QC would be a real boon for Ruby. 
--Mind you though, setup.rb still does things they can't. So lets draw that 
in too.

Together we stand, divided...

As they say,
T.