On Wed, 7 Nov 2007, Florian Frank wrote:
> Trans wrote:
> >>>> I'm a bit confused. If I have a pure-ruby version of my lib, but also
> >>>> have some extensions that can speed things up, should the pure-ruby
> >>>> gem be named plainly? Eg. 'foo-1.0.0.gem'. But then what platform is
[...]
> >
> > I need to provide these:
> >
> > * pure ruby version
> > * compile-on-install version
> > * win32 pre-built version
> >
> > I would like to make the first two a single gem, rather then two
> > separate gems. To do that I need RubyGems not to abort if make fails.
[...]
> >
> If you figure this out, please post the solution to the list. I had/have
> exactly the same problem with my json gem, which offers a pure ruby
> implementation variant and a faster c extension variant.
>
I wonder if this could be expressed in the gem spec file (whose
format I forget now)? Could a gem "know" to look for a faster
version of itself if exists and is up to date, given the version
constraints applied to require?
<wooly_thoughts>
What would we need if this were possible:
:preferred_alternatives_by_platform => {win32 => thingy-0.1.2, ...}
:fallback_alternatives_by_platform => {win32 => slow_thingy-0.1.2, ...}
:deprecated_alternatives_by_platform => [...]
Not sure what else we'd need to
</wooly_thoughts>
Caveat agnus, I mean lector.
Hugh
_______________________________________________
Rubygems-developers mailing list
[email protected]
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
