------art_4845_23051031.1113795588064
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline

In my view, webcollaborator.com <http://webcollaborator.com> is a new killer 
app. It is based on rails. But the killer app for ruby is Heretix the follow 
on to Rubyx.

On 4/18/05, Trans <transfire / gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> Tobias Luetke wrote:
> > > 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.
> >
> > No. This is just not how versions are used in reality. I'm absolutely
> > puzzled by the amount of negative press gem receives for this
> > immensely useful feature!
> >
> > I use require_gem all over the place to tie applications to versions.
> > For example one production server is running 6 different rails
> > applications, 4 of which are tied to specific older releases of gems,
> > redcloth and others.
> >
> > Versioned libraries aren't a neat feature, they are absolutely
> > required for everyone who is serious about ruby. Please don't talk
> > this feature down because it doesn't look nice in your cron
> > scripts....
> 
> Tobias, you misunderstand me. I am all for versioning. Its the
> implementation of it that I think has been problematic. Consider all
> your scripts with #require_gem. Would they work in an enviroment where
> the support packages were manually installed. No. You'd have to go back
> and change them to #require; or have created a rescue clause to deal
> with it to begin with; and thus more work to do in order to
> redistribute you programs. Rather I think there should be a standard
> method #require_version that Ruby supports out-of-the-box, and the libs
> should be stored in the typical fashion --with links to the lastest
> versions (examples of such excelent packaging systems include RubyX and
> Gobo Linux). Implementing in this manner would have, indeed, still can,
> thwart the issues with RUBYOPT.
> T.
> 
>

------art_4845_23051031.1113795588064--