[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Ruby Gems and Debian packages of Ruby Gems



On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 12:16:34AM -0700, Glen Pfeiffer wrote:
> I searched the archives and the web but I have not found helpful
> answers to these questions.
> 
> 1. What are the drawbacks of using the Debian packaged ruby
>    applications like 'rails' instead of the available gem?
> 
> 2. What are the benefits of using the Debian packaged ruby
>    applications like 'rails' instead of the available gem?
> 
> 3. Are there drawbacks to mixing and matching?
> 
> 4. Will Ruby applications installed as a Debian package, for
>    example rails, be able to find gems installed as a 'gem', like
>    pdf-toolkit?
> 
> I have installed rails as a gem, but only because I didn't know
> any better. Then I saw the Debian package 'rails', and now I am
> unsure what to do.
> 
> I am grateful to Debian for their commitment to the policy, but
> in this case the *result* is causing me some confusion. But let's
> not focus on the cause of the confusion, rather if you have any
> information that may enlighten me, please share. And no offense,
> but I am not interested in your opinion, only facts.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
Debian has 2 groups involved in Ruby, both have home pages and mailing
lists on the Debian 'alioth' site. This page[0] will explain the
pkg-ruby-extras policy on gems. If you need more details, ask the
mailing list related to them.
[0] http://pkg-ruby-extras.alioth.debian.org/rubygems.html
=K
-- 
|  .''`.  == Debian GNU/Linux == |       my web site:           |
| : :' :      The  Universal     |mysite.verizon.net/kevin.mark/|
| `. `'      Operating System    | go to counter.li.org and     |
|   `-    http://www.debian.org/ |    be counted! #238656       |
|  my keyserver: subkeys.pgp.net |     my NPO: cfsg.org         |
|join the new debian-community.org to help Debian!              |
|_______  Unless I ask to be CCd, assume I am subscribed _______|

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: