[DRE-maint] Bug#448639: Debian Bugs information: detailed logs for Bug#448639

[Adam Jacob]

On Aug 30, 2010, at 10:58 AM, Tim Olsen <tim at brooklynpenguin.com> wrote:
> What I was more thinking of was if there was a change in how rubygems
> organizes things under /usr/local.  Lucas proposed storing gems under
> /usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8.  But if rubygems needs to move things
> around upon an upgrade, then that's technically a violation.  Even
> setting up directories under /usr/local upon rubygems installation might
> be considered a violation.  One possibility is to store everything *but*
> executables outside of /usr/local.

I think that would be acceptable, but I'm not sure it's necessary.  The on disk gem format (with gems under a gems dir in an arch specific path) has been pretty consistent.  

If CPAN did this, I imagine we would still ship the new version, and just warn users about the breakage on upgrade.  With 1.9 shipping rubygems in the core ruby distribution, I think we can be safe in saying if the upstream does this, users are on their own: they choose an external package system, so they can suffer the consequences of a fickle upstream. 

Best,
Adam