On Feb 3, 7:55 pm, Eric Hodel <drbr... / segment7.net> wrote:
> On Feb 3, 2007, at 11:02, Trans wrote:
>
> > I have my own rendition of rubyforge.rb that I made based on the
> > Ara's original. This script used to be tucked away in the Reap
> > project, but I'm reorgainizing my tools
> > and I was thinking of releasing this separately. But what wll I
> > call it since "rubyforge" is already used? Are other's going to be
> > happy if I call it "rubyforge2" ?
>
> Why don't you instead adapt your changes into a patch and file it in
> the codeforpeople tracker?  There's no sense in having an extra
> version lying around just because you added one or two things.

It not just one or two things, though. It's a good bit different in
how it deals with config information. Mine was based on pre 0.0.0
version and I made modification in scraping project information too
but in a very different way than codeforpeople, ie. it doesn't require
the setup stage, but scrapes the info on the fly and just logs in
automatically when you do stuff. I'd be happy to contribute it, but it
is a significant shift in functionality  (though the fundamentals are
still the same -- for example I recently reused the URI and post news
code from the lastest codeforpeople version quite easily).

Aside, I sort of wish it didn't use HTTPAccess2, it seems quite a
hefty lib for what rubyforge.rb is using it for. But I'm not sure,
maybe there's no better option.

T.