From: Chad Fowler <chad@...>
Date: 2004-03-21T23:16:16+09:00
Subject: Re: rubygems - did install went ok?


On Mar 20, 2004, at 1:09 PM, Hal Fulton wrote:

> Simon Strandgaard wrote:
>> In my gem release would it be a good idea to replace
>> all occurrencies of   require 'iterator' with   require 'rubygems'
>>   require_gem 'iterator'
>> so that the sample directory works ?
>
> This seems reasonable to me for now, but I would hate to
> see it everywhere for all time.
>
>> Is there some way to automaticly load 'rubygems' when ruby starts up?
>
> I fear that gems may not be mature/stable enough for this yet. (Please
> prove me wrong.)
>

"Alpha" would imply that you are right :)

> I was also telling Chad and/or Rich that if gems become a standard, I
> would like to see require_gem simply go away.
>
> 'require' would be modified so that it looked for a gem before anything
> else. This would also make "require 'rubygems'" unnecessary.
>
>

That might be a good thing to do eventually, but I think it's good to 
keep things obviously separate while we stabilize RubyGems.  We have 
always said that RubyGems doesn't replace the 'require' facility, but 
it might be possible to augment that facility in the way that you Jason 
Creighton have proposed.

Chad