From: vruz Date: 2004-10-29T02:05:05+09:00 Subject: Re: Gems as key? Re: The real Ruby vs. Python. First of all, this email is written by me, Horacio L�pez and doesn't necessarily reflect the opinions of the RPA team. > We added it because we wanted the user to have the choice to remove a > package even if it might screw something up. I see it as being in the > same vein as allowing a programmer to pass a String into a method that may > usually expect something else. I see these comments in the same vein as comparing oranges to apples. > "Here's some rope...you can use it to tie > knots, secure things, etc. or you can hang yourself with it. it could read more like: "here's a nice tool, you can use it to run production installations without breaking stuff, streamlining the process and behaving in a predictable manner... or you can use your former package management system of choice" > We trust that you'll make the right decision, because we don't think you're an > idiot." it could read more like: "we ease the job because our focus is quality, and not everyone is willing or have time to spend building decent packages that work together well" We don't call people "idiots". Some people believe just a little policy is good for production environments, nobody is going to die because of it, and you can happily continue to design another system that has another policy (if any) that suits your needs better. I would still like to know what's the Rubygems manifesto, set of guidelines, what's the purpose, big idea, right now, based on your comments and diverging opinions from other Rubygems developers, features that appear and disappear in the next release, it's hard to tell and it feels like a bit of a moving target. It's way much more difficult to start a decent analysis of a system if you don't know what it will be like in 10 seconds from now, perhaps it's not even worth the hassle. On the other hand, it's very easy to drop FUD about a clearly defined roadmap, for bad or good. best, vruz