On May 23, 10:37 ¨Βν¬ ΙμιαΜαϊαςιδιΌιμ®®®ΐμαϊαςιδισ®γονχςοτεΊ
>
> > Also, if you want this attempt to be solved in each of the libraries
> > you mention, patches are welcome.
>
> I understand that "patches are welcome", as those are open source
> projects.
>
> (You really don't have to mention it every time.)
>

And you don't have to prepend every single thread as "BARRIER", but
you still does, so I guess is fair, right? :-)

> -
>
> The "thin" / "eventmachine" issue is trivial:
>
>  thin should require only "eventmachine" versions which have native
> gems available.
>
> The "json" issue:
>
> The author
>  should provide native gems, or
>  should provide "json_pure" as a pseudo-native-gem for windows (or
> as a general fallback)
>

Awesome, bring this to the gem authors, even better, work with them in
coordinate two projects different release schedules so these situation
gets satisfied.


> The "gem" issue:
>
> The gem team should provide a mechanism for "fallbacks", in order to
> ensure that cases like "json" can be resolved immediately without user
> interventions (instead of aborting the gem installation sequence which
> is triggered by a gem with dependencies).
>

gem installation is aborted because there is no development tools
available in your system to compile the gem.

That is way better than the failure message that was previously
displayed.

> Some gems are far to important, and they can mess up the user-
> experience completely.
>

Please see the entire thread I referred before, what you consider
complex information indeed included important information for YOU to
understand the JSON situation.

Is not that nobody have tried, but is still a complex situation.

> I have understood the issues now.
>
> Thank you very much for your time!
>

You're welcome.

--
Luis Lavena