Issue #6124 has been updated by bkabrda (Bohuslav Kabrda).


nahi (Hiroshi Nakamura) wrote:
> Assigned to me because this discussion seems related to stdlib gemification. I'll check this discussion before 2.0.

I think that this deserves the attention now, as it's a conceptual problem. I believe that it won't be matter of hours to solve this, so I would advise doing this sooner rather than later. I'll be happy to throw any ideas and help out with the coding, if needed.
@nobu: We know what the behaviour is and how things work. What we are saying is, that it should be done in a different way :)
----------------------------------------
Bug #6124: What is the purpose of "fake" gems in Ruby
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/6124#change-27216

Author: vo.x (Vit Ondruch)
Status: Closed
Priority: Normal
Assignee: nahi (Hiroshi Nakamura)
Category: 
Target version: 
ruby -v: ruby 1.9.3p0 (2011-10-30) [x86_64-linux]


As I tried to point out in #6123, the "fake" gems which are distributed with Ruby breaks user's expectations. The following example should fail:

$ ruby --disable-gems -e "puts require('bigdecimal')"
true

However, it is not failing. Could you please enlighten me what is the purpose of fake gem then? Even if you install updated BigDecimal from rubygems.org, the bundled version will won unless you use "gem 'bidgecimal'" somewhere in the code. This makes no sense.

Don't take me wrong, I am big fan of gemified stdlib #5481, however this is not the way how it should be done.


-- 
http://bugs.ruby-lang.org/