vruz wrote:
> 
> > Same point as above, rpa could provide those advantage as a layer over
> > rubygems without having to reinvent the distribution layer.
> 
> Please count the lines of code Mauricio Fernandez has kindly 
> provided to the Rubygems project.
> (if that's possible, not sure who applied the code on behalf of him,
> or under which user account he did that)
> 
> Add other patches Mauricio Fernandez has provided to the Rubygems
> team, but were (quickly) dismissed,  and  later reimplemented by
> the Rubygems team.
> 
> Compare this number to the total lines of code in Ruybgems.
> 
> The fact that a given person opts to have a low-profile personality
> and tries not to offend a team of professional programmers by
> patching a great deal of the code they have wrote,  is not IMHO
> a valid reason why  he should submit himself to the guidelines
> and  work processes of a given project.

No doubt, this is excellent and commendable!

> To my knowledge, Rubygems is not a blessed standard as it still claims
> to be, and it's a rather uncomfortable practice within an open-source
> community when people try to impose something that clearly doesn't 
> fit their purposes, interests, likes or dislikes.

RubyGems aspires to be a standard, but has never claimed to be one.

> Believe me I love good engineering, and I hate effort duplication.
> 
> But I love free speech more.

I agree, wholeheartedly.

Curt