Dne 21.11.2016 v 16:48 Chris Arcand napsal(a): > This doesn't break semver. > > It does not introduce a backwards incompatible change from the Ruby > ecosystem's perspective (the change is within internal specifications and is > completely compatible with previous versions of Ruby/RubyGems). You're > expecting a semver contract with internal gem specifications that doesn't > exist.
For better or worse, there are more views then just "Ruby/Rubygems". > >> And what I am doing with the "gem spec" output is my business, I might just >> checking its checksum, or I might modify it, it doesn't really matter. > Indeed, you can do whatever you want with the output. But note, there's > further proof your semver contract isn't applicable here - from the RubyGems > specification, `gem spec`'s purpose is described as follows: > >> The specification command allows you to extract the specification from a gem >> for **examination**. > There's no break in contract, as you're still getting what RubyGems > uses...for examination. And "examination" means that the result of "gem spec" might be different from version to version and can be freely changed? Not mentioning that this wording was introduced quite recently [1] and from the commit, there is no obvious that it would be meant as "the ouput is just informative, don't use it for anything". Just for your information, we are modifying .gemspec files for as long as I remember. This [2] is for example one of my first commit to ActionPack and you'll see that we were modifying .gemspec files at that time. May be it is not nice, but unfortunately, we have to do it. Vít [1] https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/commit/486b0549a74cdd9a4031c5ffbc511f7f809cebd5 [2] http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/rubygem-actionpack.git/commit/?id=eb9710a3a9be9f09d87a08a129a9c847945875aa _______________________________________________ ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
