> Actually, there is an important difference between require_gem and
require.  A
> require statement is a request to load a particular file into the
ruby image.
> A require_gem statement activates (enables, selects) a versioned
package.
> The key point is that a package name is not the same as a file name.

> Although there is some overlap, there are many cases where this is
not true.

On the other hand, what is being accomplished for the end user _is_ the
same. I think it is foolish to have different load code dependemt on
whether a package was installed as a gem or manually. Imagine RPA
having this too. Then we'd have #require_rpa!

I think versioning is great, but maybe RubyGems went a little overboard
in separating itself from tradtional methodologies. For instance, was
it really neccessary to make binaries indirect loads? Why could Gems
have not installed libs to the standard location and just kept track of
what it put there? Versions could have been handled via directory
stucture and symlinks to the latest version. Then it would make sense
to have a #require_version method.

T.