From: Eric Hodel <drbrain@...7.net>
Date: 2007-01-11T01:28:30+09:00
Subject: Re: Tattle - The Ruby Census

On Jan 10, 2007, at 08:16, Alex LeDonne wrote:
> On 1/10/07, Eric Hodel <drbrain@segment7.net> wrote:
>
>> You fixed this the wrong way.  The problem is in RubyGems not
>> allowing you the ability to distinguish between run-time dependencies
>> and build-time dependencies.
>
> I'm having a hard time with terminology.
>
> If you're deploying a pure ruby gem, then a build-time requirement
> which is not a run-time requirement is not a dependency, right?

Provided RubyGems allows you to make such a distinction, correct.  At  
present RubyGems dependencies are dependencies, regardless of how  
they are used.

> That is, if build-time does not include any time after the gem is
> downloaded to my client box, then stuff you (the maintainer of the
> gem) need at build time should not be a dependency in the gem sense.
>
> So "build-time dependencies" should exist in the gem sense only when a
> gem requires compilation, I think. If I am mistaken, then the phrase
> "build-time dependencies" has some meaning to you which is opaque to
> me.

By "build" I mean work on, not compile.  ZenTest is a build-time  
dependency for some of my gems because I use its assertion library  
when I'm building (adding features to or fixing bugs in) that gem.

> For clarity, I will observe that the gem process has more than build-
> and run- time...
>
> Developer-build-time
> Download-time
> Deploy-time
>  Local-build time
> Run-time

-- 
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://blog.segment7.net

I LIT YOUR GEM ON FIRE!