On Mon, 1 Feb 2010, Chad Woolley wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 9:45 AM, Hugh Sasse <[email protected]> wrote: > > ...The exact > > collection of gems could be reported in such a way that Rubygems can > > use it to perform the installation. > > I have this functionality in GemInstaller (use --print-rogue-gems > option with an empty config): > > http://geminstaller.rubyforge.org/documentation/tutorials.html#bootstrapping_your_geminstaller_config Yes, that would do the job. I think I'm correct in thinking geminstaller --config=/dev/null --print-rogue-gems would do the job, as well? > > However, I believe Bundler is a better way to solve these problems. > People should be specifying gems on a per-app or per-environment basis > instead of relying on system gems anyway. Yes, that would be the ideal case, but wouldn't cover the bug hunting case from malformed dependencies or the complete rebuild case. > > Future versions of Bundler will also allow you to version and save the > entire dependency tree as Bundler has resolved it (without requiring > you to check in .gem files in cache dir, as is currently the case). So the versions of the version tree can go into git, etc? > > -- Chad Thank you, Hugh _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list http://rubyforge.org/projects/rubygems [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
