On Aug 30, 2010, at 8:55 PM, Daigo Moriwaki wrote: > Thank you all for the invaluable comments. > > We, the Debian Ruby packagers, have decided to make a change on this issue. > > As of Ruby 1.9.2, we are merging the rubygems1.9.1 package into the new > ruby1.9.1 (1.9.2.0-1) package since the upstream seems to have integrated > Rubygems with the core more tightly[1]. You will no longer install > rubygems1.9.1 > as a separate package. > > The ruby1.8 package is another story. We will not make significant changes on > ruby1.8 since ruby1.9.1 is (hopefully) getting into the main stream and we'd > like to make more efforts on ruby1.9.1 >
This seems like an excellent and well thought out solution to this bug report in general, and also to future maintainability of rubygems. I actually think its also a nice way of gracefully declining to change long established behavior in rubygems for 1.8. Users now have a very clear line they can draw in the sand, and another reason to move forward with the new version of ruby. > Anyway, is it correct for me to say that the following locations are our > consensus? > > default_dir: /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.9.1 > default_bindir: /usr/local/bin > +1 > > [2] I hope that future Rubygems (upstream) solve this issue. Adding new > features > with large patches is beyond Ruby packager's scope. > Agreed on this last point. If it hasn't been requested/reported upstream, it should be done soon. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
