Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> 
> Note there are not many development communities that are proud of the
> fact of having different, incompatible versions of the same software
> being widely used at the same time.
Because Ruby is growing and moving quite fast at the moment. When it 
slows down, there will be a major change in the general attitude of the 
community regarding breaking code. Still, a young API can and most 
likely should change. We all respect that - but now that's beside the 
point.
> 
> Most other communities solve that by having more stable APIs and making
> sure that their important software supports the latest API.
Again.. Growing community ;-)
> 
> In Debian Squeeze (next Debian release), we ship (and support for
> several years) ruby 1.8 (likely 1.8.249+some backports) and ruby 1.9.1
> (maybe a prerelease of 1.9.2, but unlikely). It would be totally insane,
> to, additionally, try to support several versions of the same libraries.
> Of course, if you want to install many different Ruby and gems versions,
> and then try to keep them in a sensible state wrt security issues (which
> are not that uncommon in the ruby world), that's your choice.

Sorry to be a pain for you maintainers. Switch to Gentoo ;-) It handles 
all that very well, and has done a fantastic job of handling an overlay 
tree for gems - you can essentially get the gems installed and supported 
by your distribution. It is of course far from perfect, but they're 
doing a fine job of it.
Then again, they have just recently started handling license acceptance 
for things like Java, VMWare and such, so Debian is eons ahead of them 
in that regard -- which is in fact at the core of our current debate.

> 
>> >> Also: don't let the unfriendly tone one often encounters on the internet
>> >> get ya down. The medium itself seems to encourage that sort of thing...
>> >
>> > That's not a reason to consider it acceptable.
>> 
>> True enough, OTOH, I've found it a lot easier to live on the
>> inter-tubes if I develop a thick skin, and give everyone the benefit
>> of the doubt that they are not actively trying to be uncivil, even if
>> they express themselves in what I might perceive to be an uncivil
>> fashion.
> 
> It's really to give the benefit of the doubt about civility to several
> people on this list.

Normal person + Anonymity + Audience = Total fscktard. It's a 
penny-arcade rule, and it's true. May as well be called "The Law of Gabe 
& Tyco", or whatever their names are.
For whatever it's worth, Lucas, I have tremendous respect for the work 
you do as a package maintainer. It's hard, time-consuming, sometimes 
tedious, and sadly most of the time very thankless, as it is completely 
behind the scenes.

Besides the issue of licensing mentioned above, the only other real 
issue mentioned in this thread is "What will the users think?" or WWUT, 
which can clearly be brought back to WWJDIHHAC (What would Jesus do if 
he had a computer). JEG II made a change on Ruby's website to help 
educating the users. Is it possible to add a message of some sort to the 
pre-install apt-get warning when installing Ruby, to explain the 
different Ruby packages?
I know it's not exactly Standard Operating Procedure for Debian, but 
again, Ruby moves very fast, much faster than Debian does - which is not 
a qualification, just a comparison.
-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.