On 2/3/07, Trans <transfire / gmail.com> wrote:
> So I'm thinking perhaps gems should be referenced with a namspece
> attached. For example instead of
>
>   gem install traits
>
> do:
>
>   gem install codeforpeople:traits
>
> Perhaps we could still use the former too, but if there is conflict
> the gem app can ask us which project is intended. Or something to that
> effect. Has anyone else considered remedies for this?

RubyForge currently ensures that the only traits gem that will exist
on RubyForge is the one from codeforpeople -- because they were the
first to release such. It's not quite a namespace, but it prevents the
conflict you were talking about.

There are, I think, worse problems than possible gem name collisions
(require-able contents collisions are more likely, IMO).

-austin
-- 
Austin Ziegler * halostatue / gmail.com * http://www.halostatue.ca/
               * austin / halostatue.ca * http://www.halostatue.ca/feed/
               * austin / zieglers.ca