Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-ruby (69 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-ruby] A new packaging scheme for Ruby 2.1
On 28.01.2014 16:29, Klaus Kaempf wrote:
* Duncan Mac-Vicar P. <dmacvicar@xxxxxxx> [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 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.
libruby* is actually required by shared library packaging policy.

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

Nothing. A merge of ruby-common to ruby-devel is easily doable.

The only benefit of keeping the split is that you can avoid ruby-devel
while building 99% of the gems.

Greetings, Stephan

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

< Previous Next >
List Navigation