[opensuse-ruby] ruby packaging quo vadis
hi, see $attachment. comments & critics welcome. darix -- openSUSE - SUSE Linux is my linux openSUSE is good for you www.opensuse.org
On 07/08/2011 12:44 PM, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
hi,
see $attachment. comments& critics welcome.
darix
What are other rpm distributions going to do about this? Is this already discussed with them? I am already seeing in Fedora stuff that differes from our packages (ie: provides like rubygem(rspec) ) Duncan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+help@opensuse.org
On 07/21/2011 06:38 PM, Duncan Mac-Vicar P. wrote:
What are other rpm distributions going to do about this? Is this already discussed with them?
I am already seeing in Fedora stuff that differes from our packages (ie: provides like rubygem(rspec) )
I'm almost sure that Fedora guys do not care about installing (and providing rubygems for) ruby 1.8 and 1.9 in parallel. I would suggest going the same way, but knowing that we don't have enough manpower to maintain two different sets of packages for openSUSE and SLE I won't. -- Best Regards / S pozdravom, Pavol RUSNAK SUSE LINUX, s.r.o openSUSE Boosters Team Lihovarska 1060/12 PGP 0xA6917144 19000 Praha 9 prusnak[at]opensuse.org Czech Republic -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+help@opensuse.org
On 07/21/2011 06:41 PM, Pavol Rusnak wrote:
On 07/21/2011 06:38 PM, Duncan Mac-Vicar P. wrote:
What are other rpm distributions going to do about this? Is this already discussed with them?
I am already seeing in Fedora stuff that differes from our packages (ie: provides like rubygem(rspec) )
I'm almost sure that Fedora guys do not care about installing (and providing rubygems for) ruby 1.8 and 1.9 in parallel. I would suggest going the same way, but knowing that we don't have enough manpower to maintain two different sets of packages for openSUSE and SLE I won't.
This is not about maintaining two different sets of packages. The same source could build with 1.8 in one distro and with 1.9 in another. This is about offering two rubies on the same distribution. As with Java, ruby gems only make sense when shipping a product. For development most people would be fine with rvm. Just as most developers would install Eclipse from the .zip and forget about it. This may be true even for server deployments. The difference is when you want to "ship" this product as a distributable. Then it makes sense to create rpms out of it. We don't have the manpower to package gems just for fun. We package what we need for stuff that needs to be distributed: build service (opensuse) and internally we contribute with gems needed for SUSE Studio, SLMS, etc. So, having "parallel" ruby 1.9 and 1.8 is not a real need but just something "cool". And if this would prevent us from sharing unmodified packages "it is" from other rpm distros, I see it then more as a problem than a solution. With Java in my team we are following the same strategy, trying to be able to reuse JPP and Fedora packages when possible. And we are applying different strategies only where it adds value, for example, maven packages would mean to maintain a maven stack so we went a different path and unmavenize them. I don't see this "added" value with two ruby stacks. I think the gem concept with rpm is wrong. Pure ruby gems should be noarch and shared across ruby interpreters (or not shared by using standard Requires/Conflicts). This is a big bunch of the gem world. If anything needs to be changed, it needs to be in this direction and I see this as the opposite one. -- Duncan Mac-Vicar P. - Novell® Making IT Work As One™ 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 For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+help@opensuse.org
On 2011-07-21 18:41:35 +0200, Pavol Rusnak wrote:
On 07/21/2011 06:38 PM, Duncan Mac-Vicar P. wrote:
What are other rpm distributions going to do about this? Is this already discussed with them?
I am already seeing in Fedora stuff that differes from our packages (ie: provides like rubygem(rspec) )
I'm almost sure that Fedora guys do not care about installing (and providing rubygems for) ruby 1.8 and 1.9 in parallel. I would suggest going the same way, but knowing that we don't have enough manpower to maintain two different sets of packages for openSUSE and SLE I won't.
this question is like the first thing we discussed in the meeting about the topic. and the answer was simple "studio team wants to go with 1.9 on sles. so our only option is to solve the problem of having both working at the same time". just ugprading ruby to 1.9 on sle11 sp3 is not an option. another thing you have to keep in mind: if we find a nice generic solution, we can apply the same solution to python 2 and 3. perl5 and perl6 at some point. even with lua we would need it aswell. so while atm it seems quite a bit of effort to do all the ground work it will pay back later with the other languages. and i wouldnt be too sure that fedora/rhel isnt interesting in 1.9 and 1.8 in parallel. but so far i havent contacted them because we wanted to iron out some of issues and have a proof of concept working. darix -- openSUSE - SUSE Linux is my linux openSUSE is good for you www.opensuse.org -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+help@opensuse.org
On 07/08/2011 12:44 PM, Marcus Rueckert wrote:
hi,
see $attachment. comments& critics welcome.
darix
What is the strategy other rpm distros like Fedora will take on this topic? Duncan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+help@opensuse.org
participants (3)
-
Duncan Mac-Vicar P. -
Marcus Rueckert -
Pavol Rusnak