Eivind Eklund wrote: >On 10/2/05, Devin Mullins <twifkak / comcast.net> wrote: > > >>`gem uninstall thegems` >> >> >What if other stuff rely on those gems? Like user-written code? > > OK, point. What does apt-get (or ports) do natively to fix this? >>I guess my concern with repackaging is that it introduces duplication. >> >> >In what way are you thinking of? > > For a given libraries, you would have multiple packages (RubyGems, ports, apt-get, portage, rpm, fink, darwinports...) all that contain the same meaning in them -- what to install and how to install it. Much of the same logic comprises each of those packages. I would rather efforts be taken to put as much of the logic in a single package system, and let the other ones be "adapters" to that one. Further, this causes one of two problems for the library author: 1. He's got to publish in 10 different package formats 2. His library has got to be famous enough that the major packaging systems have put maintainers in charge of his library, and he's got to not mind the delay. >I think not repackaging introduce duplication, in the form of >duplicated package managers handling the same machine, and thus >duplicated interfaces the user needs to know. > > Yeah, I see your point here. I would think that an "adapter" technique would solve the UI problem better than static repackaging would. As far as multiple package managers being duplication, well, that's true, but there are, like, twenty web frameworks for Python, and that's likely not going to change. Duplication of effort is a fact of life. :) >really >ideally, they'd be able to hook together nicely - unfortunately, I'm >uncertain if that is doable in practice (for combined technical and >social reasons.) > > That's too bad. Imagine if there existed a single piece of code that allowed apt-get to interact with .gem files and gems.rubyforge.com. That would allow apt-get users to control Ruby libs, and wouldn't require each lib to be repackaged for apt-get specifically. (It would't obviate all those differences you've pointed out, of course.) Devin