On Sep 4, 2010, at 22:37 , NARUSE, Yui wrote:

> (2010/09/03 21:58), Aaron Patterson wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 04:27:07PM +0900, NARUSE, Yui wrote:
>>> 2010/9/3 NARUSE, Yui<naruse / airemix.jp>:
>>>> 2010/9/2 U.Nakamura<usa / garbagecollect.jp>:
>>>>> I think that we should not increase bundled libraries, because
>>>>> we already have rubygems as standard library installer.
>>>> 
>>>> I agree with this.
>>> 
>>> We may have to do more explanation, it is Big Ruby-ism vs. Small Ruby-ism.
>>> Big Ruby-ism thinks that Ruby package should be all-in-one package for
>>> common use.
>>> Small Ruby-ism thinks that Ruby package should be as small as it can
>>> (bundle libs depended by RubyGems).
>> 
>> I think there is a third option: Medium Ruby-ism.  Convert all of stdlib
>> to be gems, and have Ruby ship with a default set of gems.
> 
> Libraries depended by gem, test or rdoc must be bundled.
> Most of current libraries are such things.

I agree... except for the tests for that library itself.

rexml is only depended upon by rss and xmlrpc. All three of those could be happy happy gems. Since rexml, rss, and xmlrpc are not needed by ruby itself for the build or for any other tests, they seem a good candidate for gemifying.

The only things needed by rubygems, test, or rdoc (base requirements for build and install) are rubygems, minitest+test/unit wrapper, and rdoc. Everything else can be gemified and we can have Medium Ruby.