On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 08:20:37 +0900, Ben Giddings
<bg-rubytalk / infofiend.com> wrote:
> RPA doesn't
> care too much about the package format, it's more focused on the
> process, and making sure that there are consistent, documented libraries
> that are production-ready (that's what your manifesto says anyhow).
> This is like how the FreeBSD ports system works (or so I understand).
> The packages are audited, repositories are maintained, etc.  RubyGems on
> the other hand *seems* to be an attempt to create a package format, a
> repository and a basic package manager, with new features added as they
> become necessary.  This is like the rpm package format and the rpm
> commandline tool.  On the other hand, there's no attempt made to see if
> a given foo.rpm is any good.

Both sides have the *same* goal: Get code from the writers to the users.

The methods remind me of the "Worse Is Better" concept:
http://www.dreamsongs.com/WorseIsBetter.html

Here we have RubyGems as "Worse" and RPA as the "Right Thing"...
someone just needs to point out that they are trying to do the same
thing: get the best Ruby code out to the people who want it. It is
just that one side talks about manifestos and the other talks about
purpose, beyond that they have the same goal.

The methods are just different..

Douglas