On Nov 30, 2006, at 1034 , Chad Fowler wrote: > On 11/29/06, Eric Hodel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Nov 29, 2006, at 0504 , Chad Fowler wrote: >>> On 11/28/06, Chad Woolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> Anyway, it's almost releasable, except for one hitch: I can't >>>> figure >>>> out how to programatically specify a platform for multiplatform/ >>>> binary >>>> gems; I always get prompted with the list of platform/version >>>> choices. >>> >>> Hi. You're right that this is a limitation. Jim and I discussed it >>> at length at the recent Rails Edge conference. We have a >>> solution in >>> mind, but we haven't started hacking yet. >> >> Can you discuss details? I'd like the tinderbox to not waste time >> and bandwidth attempting to run non-platform gems. (And be capable >> of running platform gems.) > > We talked about several possibilities, but I think what we settled on > is having RubyGems look for a list of matching platforms in best-match > order. This would mean the client would have a built-in taxonomy of > sorts. We would then allow you to override it via the command line or > the gemrc.
An array of platforms should be good-enough. You can probably even default to (detected_platform, RUBY). > We created this project called tattle > (http://rubyforge.org/projects/tattle/) to start collecting info about > the install footprint of the Ruby community hoping it would help us > create this little taxonomy of platforms. I think we'll be surprised > at how many different platform combos we see. When will tattle be released? -- Eric Hodel - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://blog.segment7.net I LIT YOUR GEM ON FIRE! _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list Rubygems-developers@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
