+1 monkeying with gem versions is largely redundant with bundler now so I
think it's best to take it out (assume read-only, like you said) and leave
it to the more sophisticated tool.

alex

On Tuesday, July 26, 2011, Rhett Sutphin <rh...@detailedbalance.net> wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Jul 26, 2011, at 7:11 AM, Peter Donald wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am looking at upgrading buildrs dependency on rubygems to a later
version
>> and being more explicit about the version. i.e. Something like
>>
>> spec.add_dependency 'rubygems-update',      '>= 1.8.6'
>
> Good idea, though the gemspec line you want is something like this:
>
> s.required_rubygems_version = ">= 1.8.6"
>
> Is 1.8.6 specifically required? I would ask that you try to make this as
loose as possible. Many releases in the 1.7 and 1.8 line have been broken or
unreasonably noisy, so I have been conservative about upgrading. (I'm still
mostly using 1.6.2.)
>
>>
>> However as I was going through this I noticed we are using a whole
whackload
>> of deprecated features that is planned to be remove from rubygems in the
>> next few months, in particular "Gem:SourceIndex". We mostly use the
plugin
>> to ensure the build has necessary dependencies before it rus (i.e. if you
>> have added it to build.yaml) and to install gems as part of :gem
packaging.
>> As both of these features were broken up until a few releases ago I would
>> guess they are barely used. In some environments some of these features
>> continue to be broken (in particular installing of gems).
>
> Yes, automatically installing gems from build.yml has been broken for a
long time. I've tried patching it a few times, but never come up with a
solution inside buildr that works consistently. Eventually I gave up and
added a script like this
>
> https://github.com/NUBIC/psc-mirror/blob/trunk/install_gems.rb
>
> in each of my projects that uses buildr.
>
>>
>> The ruby world seems to be going in a few different directions to manage
>> dependencies (i.e. rvm, bundler, ...) but most of them involve the
runtime
>> managing them.
>>
>> So I propose that we remove all the usage of these features and just
>> consider the rubygems library as a read-only interface. We could change
the
>> startup scanning of build.yaml and rather than trying to install missing
>> dependencies just print an error on the console and exit. For the
:install
>> phase of gem package I think it would be best to let people manage it in
a
>> way that makes sense in their environment. We could add documentation to
>> fill this gap.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
> This makes sense to me. I've explained my feelings about the gem
installer. I don't use the gem package type nor do I recall anyone ever
asking a question about it on the mailing list.
>
> Rhett
>
>>
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Peter Donald
>
>

Reply via email to