On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 6:28 PM, Trans <transf...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sep 29, 3:19 pm, Luis Lavena <luislav...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 6:12 AM, Trans <transf...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > I recently noticed that `gem` had a `lock` command. I played around >> > with it and found it mostly useless. First, one has to provide it the >> > name and version of an installed gem. It would be much more useful if >> > it could take a gemspec file instead. Also, it does not appear to >> > utilize remote gem source(s) to resolve best dependencies, but simply >> > uses the versions of gems installed locally. It would be much more >> > useful if it recognized the --remote option and acted accordingly. >> > Also, it could use an option to include/not-include development >> > dependencies. >> >> I actually don't remember the last time I used that command and >> discarded by ~> in my gem dependencies >> >> Do we have a 1.4.x Roadmap? If not, this for sure can be removed then. > > Why remove it? Why not just fix it?
The logic for dependency resolution (ala: bundler AOT) is not easy stuff which could grow our codebase and maintenance requirements. IMHO with Bundler and Isolate out there, posible usefulness of lock has disappeared. But, if you want it fixed, you can fork it and send the pull request, I would love to review it and if it works, happy to merge it. -- Luis Lavena AREA 17 - Perfection in design is achieved not when there is nothing more to add, but rather when there is nothing more to take away. Antoine de Saint-Exupéry _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list http://rubyforge.org/projects/rubygems Rubygems-developers@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
