From: ptkwt@...1.aracnet.com (Phil Tomson)
Date: 2003-05-07T04:10:39+09:00
Subject: Re: A wishlist for a "Ruby Standard Library"

In article <26dc48e2.0305060807.172b074f@posting.google.com>,
Guerry Semones <gsemones@treenleaf.com> wrote:
>To play devil's advocate here, I'd rather have more of a CPAN type of
>solution available, where it is easy to acquire and install modules,
>rather than have them all bundled into the "official" distribution.
>

Same here.  But I think that part of the reason we're moving toward a 
'fat' distribution (rubysumo) is because we haven't been able to agree on 
an installation standard.  There are solutions out there (raainstall and 
rpkg come to mind) but as a community we can't seem to agree on which 
system to use and on how to deal with dependencies.  There are proposals 
out there and in some cases people have written 'proof-of-concept' code, 
but nothing much happens in this department.

So it turns out that it's just much easier (from a community standpoint) 
to just make a 'fat' distribution with lots of commonly used packages in 
it because we can't reach any kind of consensus on what kind of package 
installation/dependency tracking solution to use.

Phil