On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Eric Hodel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Jun 4, 2008, at 10:03 AM, Jeremy Kemper wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jun 4, 2008 at 3:15 AM, Eric Hodel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> On Jun 4, 2008, at 00:33 AM, Stephen Bannasch wrote: >>>> >>>> At 6:22 PM -0700 6/3/08, Jeremy Kemper wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 4:36 PM, Eric Hodel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> I believe RubyGems is currently feature-complete for the next release. >>>>>> For >>>>>> the next while I'll be focusing on bugfixes and patches from the >>>>>> tracker. I >>>>>> expect to release a new version in two weeks at minimum, possibly >>>>>> longer. >>>>> >>>>> I'd love to see little-known --format-executable enabled by default >>>>> for gem installs. >>>> >>>> I would like the opposite to be the default. >>> >>> I would love to make --format-executable the default, but that will cause >>> too much confusion and will inconvenience the majority too much. (Maybe >>> I >>> shouldn't have made it default for setup.rb/gem update --system, but the >>> two >>> new rubygems/defaults files may help improve that situation.) >> >> The naming changes only when that person has changed his ruby's naming >> also, so it feels natural. >> >> The majority have a vanilla ruby so they'll see no change or confusion. > > apt-packaged ruby installs as ruby1.8, FreeBSD ports ruby installs as > ruby18, and both provide a link from ruby to the correct name. From the > setup.rb change, I believe a majority of the other packaging systems install > ruby this way. Not as many people build ruby by hand.
Hm, that's true. Bummer. > If you want to make --format-executable the default for you, ~/.gemrc allows > you to make it so. Yep. I'll stick with that. Thanks, jeremy _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list [email protected] http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
