On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 8:10 PM, Evan Phoenix <e...@phx.io> wrote: > I believe that rubygems.org needs to limit the max size of a .gem file which > will be allowed. > > ... > > You can see from the histogram that 96% of gems are less than one megabyte, > and 98% are 3 megs or less. It seems like that fact should inform our > decision. > > To start the decision, let me throw out a starting point: 10 megs. > > Looking at the biggest non-accidental gems, they're almost all jruby related > and contain huge .jar files. We've pinged others about removing the > impediment to pushing gems with maven deps and thusly devs would use that > functionality rather than packaging the jars within the gems themselves. >
That leaves out gems with native dependencies like qtbindings. QT is massive and to ask users to compile it to be able to install it on Windows is very problematic. qtbindings pre-compiled for Windows weight ~43MB, the limit you comment will block them from publishing gems. There are other gems with pre-compiled bindings like qtbindings or gtk2 (12MB) out. -- Luis Lavena AREA 17 - Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but rather when there is nothing more to take away. Antoine de Saint-Exupéry _______________________________________________ RubyGems-Developers mailing list http://rubyforge.org/projects/rubygems RubyGems-Developers@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
