--xgyAXRrhYN0wYx8y Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 10:13:31PM +0900, Yusuke ENDOH wrote: > Hi, >=20 > 2010/9/9 Aaron Patterson <aaron / tenderlovemaking.com>: > > Can you elaborate on the criteria required for importing a library to > > stdlib? I do not understand the requirements. >=20 > IMO, we need either: >=20 > - An unavoidable reason why the core team couldn't help but bundle > it, or We're all good engineers, so it's easy for us to come up with reasons to avoid bundling. Unfortunately, the only unavoidable reasons in favor of bundling anything in stdlib are - it's already been bundled, so we must continue to bundle it - it's required for ruby build process Nokogiri has not been bundled yet, and I don't think we need an XML parser = for Ruby build process (maybe we should switch to ant? ;-) ). > - Matz or Yugui's authority ;-) I guess I am forced to appeal to Matz and Yugui! > Ruby 1.8 was an epoch of enhancing stdlib, but unfortunately, many > maintainers left, which results in severe maintenance problems. > In addition, Ruby 1.9 includes RubyGems, which allow users to > install a library easily. > Furthermore, Ruby has been criticized because of disregard for > compatibility. >=20 > These three made the 1.9 stdlib set very pedantic, I think. I think you're right. But I also think giving an easy way for stdlib to have out of band releases would help these problems. --=20 Aaron Patterson http://tenderlovemaking.com/ --xgyAXRrhYN0wYx8y Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (Darwin) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMiSJlAAoJEJUxcLy0/6/GvjsH/1cSzjZbA83Z/cPG1ALwZBxR BIccQu40S1AbhECu4WXLk0WcRDf3veGi8EKXOzsKdmDPHZDJHcpX2TXlaAiDNrSg AdSERpl0hZoTCXIGmjyYcQGPyQdZ0MmR7rK2gRV7QsqxgUOSaOeHH12VyuvEjW+t +iGkPd2U6xYDN3b76XR0cvkqrUoWyY+Ta8hGA0YhGaBGote5fVafxe/uOSwRUE5F vDzj4CZyZWL2yY/VbQNjSIysZ+ZQOJqjotsGSWWV8m5PNQ6kF5dIwFvyvan31410 OUFfmW5u7jdNdLH9SO4lMw0VgR4e/BgZ/Y3qIvr1JCwVU3OHmA/OPDty2qCxWq0= =3fVC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --xgyAXRrhYN0wYx8y-- On Thu, Sep 09, 2010 at 10:13:31PM +0900, Yusuke ENDOH wrote: > Hi, >=20 > 2010/9/9 Aaron Patterson <aaron / tenderlovemaking.com>: > > Can you elaborate on the criteria required for importing a library to > > stdlib? I do not understand the requirements. >=20 > IMO, we need either: >=20 > - An unavoidable reason why the core team couldn't help but bundle > it, or We're all good engineers, so it's easy for us to come up with reasons to avoid bundling. Unfortunately, the only unavoidable reasons in favor of bundling anything in stdlib are - it's already been bundled, so we must continue to bundle it - it's required for ruby build process Nokogiri has not been bundled yet, and I don't think we need an XML parser = for Ruby build process (maybe we should switch to ant? ;-) ). > - Matz or Yugui's authority ;-) I guess I am forced to appeal to Matz and Yugui! > Ruby 1.8 was an epoch of enhancing stdlib, but unfortunately, many > maintainers left, which results in severe maintenance problems. > In addition, Ruby 1.9 includes RubyGems, which allow users to > install a library easily. > Furthermore, Ruby has been criticized because of disregard for > compatibility. >=20 > These three made the 1.9 stdlib set very pedantic, I think. I think you're right. But I also think giving an easy way for stdlib to have out of band releases would help these problems. --=20 Aaron Patterson http://tenderlovemaking.com/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (Darwin) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMiSJlAAoJEJUxcLy0/6/GvjsH/1cSzjZbA83Z/cPG1ALwZBxR BIccQu40S1AbhECu4WXLk0WcRDf3veGi8EKXOzsKdmDPHZDJHcpX2TXlaAiDNrSg AdSERpl0hZoTCXIGmjyYcQGPyQdZ0MmR7rK2gRV7QsqxgUOSaOeHH12VyuvEjW+t +iGkPd2U6xYDN3b76XR0cvkqrUoWyY+Ta8hGA0YhGaBGote5fVafxe/uOSwRUE5F vDzj4CZyZWL2yY/VbQNjSIysZ+ZQOJqjotsGSWWV8m5PNQ6kF5dIwFvyvan31410 OUFfmW5u7jdNdLH9SO4lMw0VgR4e/BgZ/Y3qIvr1JCwVU3OHmA/OPDty2qCxWq0= =3fVC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----