Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-ruby (69 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-ruby] A new packaging scheme for Ruby 2.1
  • From: "Duncan Mac-Vicar P." <dmacvicar@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 14:53:20 +0100
  • Message-id: <52E7B650.8010400@suse.de>
On 22/01/14 13:23, Klaus Kaempf wrote:
Hi,

going forward, Ruby becomes more important in the openSUSE and SLES
codebase. This is why Coolo asked me to come up with a new Ruby
packaging scheme. Read on to learn about my current thinking in this
regard.

What are the goals ?

1. revert the ruby, rubyXY, and ruby-common split
Initially done to allow multiple Ruby versions in parallel, it
wasn't really used and developers use rvm or rbenv to achieve the
same effect.
From a buildservice perspective, this split cause more headaches
than it provided value.

2. Ruby will be part of inst-sys (for YaST)
As you know, size matters.
Looking at the ruby20 package, it has an install size of 18MB
However, 'du -sh /usr/share/doc/packages/ruby20' reports 5.9 MB
just for documentation.

3. The new package scheme should support maintenance better
A split between binaries, shared libraries, and Ruby stdlib seems
desirable


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?
5. What prevent those to go to ruby-devel?




--
Duncan Mac-Vicar P. - http://www.suse.com/

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@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-ruby+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >
List Navigation
Follow Ups
References