* Duncan Mac-Vicar P. <dmacvicar@suse.de> [Jan 28. 2014 14:53]:
Packaging proposal:
I'd like to generate the following packages for Ruby 2.1
1. ruby-2.1 This would provide binaries (ruby, irb, rake, gem, ...) and a minimal set of documentation (changelog, readme, news, ...)
2. libruby2 This would only provide the libruby2.1.so.2.0.0 shared library
3. ruby-stdlib This would provide the /usr/lib64/ruby/2.1.0/ directory tree.
4. ruby-doc This would provide the full Ruby documentation including samples.
5. ruby-macros ? This would be a new name for ruby-common, a package only used for building ruby GEM packages. Actually, I'm not happy about the name. It should reflect the package usage. ruby-devel-build or ruby-build-macros could be alternatives.
6. ruby-devel, ruby-devel-extra, ruby-doc-ri These would stay unchanged.
I agree with .4.
2. is useful only for extensions I guess. 3. Not sure if this bring value. Can ruby be already be ran without the stdlib or will the package have to require it anyway?
2+3 would be a hard dependency of the main ruby package. The split is just for maintenance/upgrade reasons, to make fixes easier to distribute and faster to install.
5. What prevent those to go to ruby-devel?
Nothing. A merge of ruby-common to ruby-devel is easily doable. Klaus -- SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+owner@opensuse.org