On Sep 18, 2012, at 11:00 AM, Perry Smith wrote:

> Hi
>=20
> I posted this question to stackoverflow:
>=20
> =
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12438097/warnings-doing-gem-rdoc-railti=
es-ri
>=20
> In brief, the command
>=20
> gem rdoc railties --ri --overwrite
>=20
> produces lots of warnings and no ri output is generated.  I'm trying =
to understand if the problem is with my set up, railties, or rubygems.
>=20
> I apologize if this is not appropriate for this list.  I opted to send =
it because it seems pervasive without a solution (that I can find).

Thank you to Eric for responding.  The question was very poorly phrased =
it turns out.  I incorrectly assumed the warnings was the reason "gem =
rdoc railties" was not producing documentation.  It turns out it is in =
the gem specification.

The reason for this email is to propose a change to the Deprecation =
system.  It needs to be opt-ed in by an environment variable.  It is =
just a bunch of chatter that no one pays attention to.  In this example, =
it lead to an incorrect assumption.

If I'm developing on top of Rails (for example), then I am a user of =
rails -- not a developer.  Indeed, if someone is using my application, =
then they are a user -- not a developer.  The warnings only confuse the =
users.  They are nice for developers but at this point there are more =
users than developers.  The developers should need to opt-in to get the =
deprecation warnings.  Currently, the user's can't even opt-out.

Perry