On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 7:21 PM, Josh Cheek <josh.cheek / gmail.com> wrote:

> I wonder how many people _don't_ use rubygems. What creates more work,
> requiring rubygems so that people who don't want it don't have to use it, or
> not requiring rubygems so that people who do want it have to keep putting
> -rubygems when they load files?

If they installed your gem using rubygems they will load rubygems.
They can't load your library otherwise in the first place. Executables
may be a different story.

The way dependencies are available in your client's machine is not
your business! I gave several examples where rubygems may not be
available at runtime.