On Apr 18, 2008, at 06:07 AM, Donavan Pantke wrote:
> On Friday 18 April 2008 04:01:01 am Eric Hodel wrote:
>> On Apr 17, 2008, at 22:38 PM, Chad Woolley wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Eric Hodel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> wrote:
A user of RubyGems can already control which gem gets
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 6:07 AM, Donavan Pantke
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Friday 18 April 2008 04:01:01 am Eric Hodel wrote:
> > Be careful not to require any files from 'a' and remove 'a' from the
> > set of active gems. (Hard)
Is this hard primarily because you have to follow the entire
On Friday 18 April 2008 04:01:01 am Eric Hodel wrote:
> On Apr 17, 2008, at 22:38 PM, Chad Woolley wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Eric Hodel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> >> A user of RubyGems can already control which gem gets activated with
> >> Kernel#gem. However, it is up to
On Apr 17, 2008, at 22:38 PM, Chad Woolley wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Eric Hodel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>> A user of RubyGems can already control which gem gets activated with
>> Kernel#gem. However, it is up to the user to activate the gems they
>> need in dependency order.
