+1 for this; I was very excited when rake gems came, but now I find myself
never using it because of these problems.
For instance, when I download an app I want to set it up -- can't do rake
db:schema:load because of missing dependency and I can't do rake
gems:install because of missing database s
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 5:39 PM, Chad Woolley wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Josh Susser wrote:
>>
>> This is a good improvement, but I dislike that building gems loads the
>> environment at all. If something in your environment file uses a
>> class defined in a gem, you get a circ
On Sun, Jan 25, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Josh Susser wrote:
>
> This is a good improvement, but I dislike that building gems loads the
> environment at all. If something in your environment file uses a
> class defined in a gem, you get a circular dependency where you need
> the gem you're trying to buil
I recently encountered this circular dependency but I'm not a fan of
by passing the environment and more importantly the preinitializer
which my app makes heavy use of. The only problem I ran into was the
Rails::Initializer#prepare_dispatcher method that caused my
ApplicationController an
This is a good improvement, but I dislike that building gems loads the
environment at all. If something in your environment file uses a
class defined in a gem, you get a circular dependency where you need
the gem you're trying to build in order to build gems at all. Seems
like the only w
+1
On Fri, Jan 23, 2009 at 7:17 PM, Mark Van Holstyn wrote:
>
> If gems are configured in config/environments/test.rb and "rake
> gems:build" is run in the production environment, the gems configured
> for the test environment are built. This forces the production machine
> to have the necessary
