[DRE-maint] Ruby-full, what next ?
vincent.fourmond at 9online.fr
Fri Jan 19 19:51:15 CET 2007
Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 16/01/07 at 12:11 +0100, Vincent Fourmond wrote:
Sorry, I missed your post...
> I missed part of the discussion, but how does your proposal compare with
> the libruby-extras package ?
Basically, many people complain on ruby-talk about the fact that a
standard ruby installation is spread among many packages (see bug
#290705). Ruby-full is here to pull all the dependencies that add up to
a full ruby installation (that is, all packages from the ruby1.8 source
package, minus ruby-tk which is only recommended). That includes ri,
rdoc, irb, ruby1.8-dev and the like which are not provided by
libruby-extras, which are dealing only with useful libraries (there is
quite some overlap with ruby-full, but not inclusion).
> Also, it's probably too late for etch anyway: you'd still have to go
> through NEW first. I think it's better to wait until everybody agrees on
> something, and not upload too fast.
That is a pity. I really don't see what is wrong about having a
dependency package which many debian users are actually asking for (just
grep for debian on the comp.lang.ruby, you won't be pleased by the answers).
Vincent Fourmond, PhD student
More information about the Pkg-ruby-extras-maintainers