From: Tom Copeland <tom@...>
Date: 2006-04-19T09:49:05+09:00
Subject: Re: non-interactive gem install impossible?

On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 09:34 +0900, Jim Weirich wrote:
> Tom Copeland wrote:
> >> No idea really.  I also would like to know how I can clear 
> >> out older gems from the mirrors so that people don't get 200 
> >> versions of mongrel to choose from.
> > 
> > Hm.  Right now the gem index builder uses all the gems that it can
> > find... perhaps it should check to see if they are set to "active" in
> > the RubyForge file user interface before adding them to the index?
> 
> Hmmm ... I'm thinking that the gem index builder probably doesn't want 
> to be too tied to the RubyForge structure, as it it used to build gem 
> indexes on a number of other sites.

Oh, definitely, I agree.  I should have said, perhaps the script that
copies over the gems into the directory that the indexer sees should
first check to see if those gems are marked as active.  So, wouldn't be
any change to the indexer code.

> But it would be a simple thing to copy old gems into a archive 
> directory.  Then the gem indexer won't see them and the index will not 
> contain them.  It should be "simple" (for some definition of simple) to 
> sweep the current gems and select gems to be moved.  I would suggest 
> leaving at least 3 versions and anything in the last year in normal 
> directory, everything else moves to the archive.
> 
> If you want to have the gems in the archive available for folks that 
> *really* want the old versions, then run the gem index builder in the 
> archive directory as well (and the index there will be independent of 
> the main index).  If you want an archived gem, just use the --source 
> option on the gem command to grab it from the archive.
> 
> Shouldn't be too hard to setup.

Yup, and also, there's always the old-fashioned way - just download them
from the project's file area and install them --local.

Yours,

Tom