From: Christian Neukirchen Date: 2005-07-07T02:54:26+09:00 Subject: Re: Ruby under Cygwin problems Lothar Scholz writes: > Hello Christian, Hi Lothar. :-) > CN> Lothar Scholz writes: > >>> i don't have a problem with writing "require 'rubygems'" on the first >>> line. I wouldn't add a rescue clause as i think it's a valid option to >>> force a user to have rubygems installed as some of the requirements of >>> your library. > > CN> If you decide to go this way, please make sure you also publish your > CN> software as a gem only, so they won't even have the slightest chance > CN> to have a look at the code and determine whether it would be > CN> reasonable to dig it out. > > Sorry i don't understand your argument. If gems are not installed > you get a brief description from the remote source and if they are > installed you can simply browse the source code. And if there was a tar.gz not depending rubygems, I could just grab it and look into it. If you automate your builds and shipping anyway, come on, *this* can't be that hard to do. In case not everyone has noticed: There are people that don't want to use Rubygems and therefore don't have it installed. > The only problem comes when the install of a gem terminates with an > error, like not being able to compile a binary extension. But as i > pointed out before binary extensions are still a general problem for > rubygems. And not the only one, unfortunately... > Lothar Scholz -- Christian Neukirchen http://chneukirchen.org