On Aug 21, 2009, at 7:29 PM, Ryan Davis wrote:
Apparently I was wrong and the behavior is intended. I think it is wrong (but in this case I also think this is a case of bad code as well). I think that gem plugin activation should be explicit.
Really? What is the intended purpose? -- -- Jim Weirich -- [email protected] _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list http://rubyforge.org/projects/rubygems [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
