In article <20021212060432.GC5879 / rysa.inetz.com>,
why the lucky stiff  <ruby-talk / whytheluckystiff.net> wrote:
>Rich Kilmer (rich / infoether.com) wrote:
>> And there are some of us ruby folk who develop on Windows and not Linux
>> (so we can be closer to our users ;-) and the common compression is .zip
>> format.  Now I happen to _have_ the ability to tar and gzip the file,
>> but don't you think you should support something on standard unix
>> (tar.gz) and standard win32 (zip)?
>> 
>> If it makes everyone happy I will tar.gz jabber4r.
>> 
>> -rich
>> 
>
>With the new canonical name, we could go for a different approach, Rich.  RAA
>could simply contain the distribution directory.  In jabber4r's case
>this would be http://www.infoether.com/ruby/jabber4r/releases/.  

But what about the future when we hope to have all the packages in a 
central repository with mirrors? (like freepan?)

>Users
>accessing RAA would click on the link to see a choice of packages.
>

What if you're using raa-install?

>In order for this to work with Raa-install, packages would have to have
>a predicatable naming convention, such as [name]-[version].tar.gz.  Aha!
>Jabber4r uses this convention already!  Raa-install attempts to download
>http://www.infoether.com/ruby/jabber4r/releases/jabber4r-0.3.0.tar.gz.

I still don't see how this works with raa-install?  I think that we're 
better off using the Ruby tar implemention - that way we can untar on 
Windows without having an actual 'tar' binary installed on Windows.

Phil
-- 
"Or perhaps the truth is less interesting than the facts?" 
Amy Weiss (accusing theregister.co.uk of engaging in 'tabloid journalism')
Senior VP, Communications
Recording Industry Association of America