Luis Lavena wrote: > Charlie: > > I can point you to several posts of people with messed PATH and ended > with problems installing gem, just a few weeks back, here on this > list: > > http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rubygems-developers/2008-March/003633.html > > I got several mails to my inbox about Mongrel too, and some "new" ones > for One-Click Installer... > > So the thing is: if JRuby uses RubyGems, and 'ruby' executable is > labeled 'jruby', why not name rubygems 'jgem'?
Because Rails installs as 'rails', Rake installs as 'rake', RSpec installs as 'spec', and so on. Unless we're going to consistently add a prefix or suffix to all installed scripts, this is only going to be confusing. Besides, if someone really needs JRuby's 'gem' script to be 'jgem', it can be aliased or symlinked trivially, or you can run "jruby -S gem" to pick up the one associated with your current JRuby version. JRuby doesn't install its executables in a global path, so you can change anything you want. FWIW, I'm going to continue including a 'gem' script with JRuby releases no matter what, since that's the command everyone uses and I want it to work. > In any case, there should be a warning or something if another ruby > implementation is in the PATH... > > I don't know how to fix this and makes everybody happy... Make it 'gem' in all cases, and people can add aliases as they desire. I really don't think it should be different for different impls, since it's the same library, the same code, the same logic. It should be 'gem'. - Charlie _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
