--pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 10:50:51PM +0900, Vit Ondruch wrote:
>=20
> Issue #6124 has been reported by Vit Ondruch.
>=20
> ----------------------------------------
> Bug #6124: What is the purpose of "fake" gems in Ruby
> https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6124
>=20
> Author: Vit Ondruch
> Status: Open
> Priority: Normal
> Assignee: Eric Hodel
> Category:=20
> Target version:=20
> ruby -v: ruby 1.9.3p0 (2011-10-30) [x86_64-linux]
>=20
>=20
> As I tried to point out in #6123, the "fake" gems which are distributed w=
ith Ruby breaks user's expectations. The following example should fail:
>=20
> $ ruby --disable-gems -e "puts require('bigdecimal')"
> true
>=20
> However, it is not failing. Could you please enlighten me what is the pur=
pose of fake gem then? Even if you install updated BigDecimal from rubygems=
=2Eorg, the bundled version will won unless you use "gem 'bidgecimal'" some=
where in the code. This makes no sense.
>=20
> Don't take me wrong, I am big fan of gemified stdlib #5481, however this =
is not the way how it should be done.

I think this works because stdlib load path is searched regardless of
gem activation or not.  These gems are real, they're just installed in a
special location.

I'm not sure if this is a good thing, but it does maintain backwards
compatibility.

--=20
Aaron Patterson
http://tenderlovemaking.com/

--pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPV5DZAAoJEJUxcLy0/6/G2OgH/j4vcWBUQgrai6OqiKRWguEA
W/duOBiGMW0yrK0HyaHPxZilcaxKp06bQo9TjehzGSnLkHYBMYmatwGoa3j+Lezd
xd+JAXTmABlweGNj7fciO7ZsCazPHM1tZvEHCUQImh8LtpiMGi1Ht4fxkpV8YwM8
tf7nFq2KW5cgZ8pq+uoc+2PsUuY+66o/IRxNLmst/vNlH/nfZB2C3VjKx+A16aL0
iloc3Hs02b9Mep3UW2KNPnkIYHbdTw0jgnDklf/5V5zMCyLwupYNewmBScmOzTCu
RYyJp018H3gcgVykGzg6tbyfekeLjz/4C5ACEIu4BKzbn3jbuGBI9f2S4jtPiHg=
=q1r/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--pvezYHf7grwyp3Bc--

On Wed, Mar 07, 2012 at 10:50:51PM +0900, Vit Ondruch wrote:
>=20
> Issue #6124 has been reported by Vit Ondruch.
>=20
> ----------------------------------------
> Bug #6124: What is the purpose of "fake" gems in Ruby
> https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6124
>=20
> Author: Vit Ondruch
> Status: Open
> Priority: Normal
> Assignee: Eric Hodel
> Category:=20
> Target version:=20
> ruby -v: ruby 1.9.3p0 (2011-10-30) [x86_64-linux]
>=20
>=20
> As I tried to point out in #6123, the "fake" gems which are distributed w=
ith Ruby breaks user's expectations. The following example should fail:
>=20
> $ ruby --disable-gems -e "puts require('bigdecimal')"
> true
>=20
> However, it is not failing. Could you please enlighten me what is the pur=
pose of fake gem then? Even if you install updated BigDecimal from rubygems=
=2Eorg, the bundled version will won unless you use "gem 'bidgecimal'" some=
where in the code. This makes no sense.
>=20
> Don't take me wrong, I am big fan of gemified stdlib #5481, however this =
is not the way how it should be done.

I think this works because stdlib load path is searched regardless of
gem activation or not.  These gems are real, they're just installed in a
special location.

I'm not sure if this is a good thing, but it does maintain backwards
compatibility.

--=20
Aaron Patterson
http://tenderlovemaking.com/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPV5DZAAoJEJUxcLy0/6/G2OgH/j4vcWBUQgrai6OqiKRWguEA
W/duOBiGMW0yrK0HyaHPxZilcaxKp06bQo9TjehzGSnLkHYBMYmatwGoa3j+Lezd
xd+JAXTmABlweGNj7fciO7ZsCazPHM1tZvEHCUQImh8LtpiMGi1Ht4fxkpV8YwM8
tf7nFq2KW5cgZ8pq+uoc+2PsUuY+66o/IRxNLmst/vNlH/nfZB2C3VjKx+A16aL0
iloc3Hs02b9Mep3UW2KNPnkIYHbdTw0jgnDklf/5V5zMCyLwupYNewmBScmOzTCu
RYyJp018H3gcgVykGzg6tbyfekeLjz/4C5ACEIu4BKzbn3jbuGBI9f2S4jtPiHg=
=q1r/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----