See below. -- Evan Phoenix // e...@fallingsnow.net
On Tuesday, July 5, 2011 at 4:29 PM, Aaron Patterson wrote: > Because of this validation: > > https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/blob/master/lib/rubygems/specification.rb#L2189-2192 > > today it's not possible to generate a gemspec with an empty > `require_paths`. I would like to build shell a gem that contain no > code, it merely depends on other gems. Could you provide some info about your use case? Does this new gem exist only to specify dependencies and therefore act as a meta-gem of sorts? > > It's possible to build these shell gems today. However, a directory > in the `required_paths` list does not exist, people who install the > gem will get an rdoc warning: > > https://github.com/rails/rails/issues/1646 > > Eric proposed a workaround of always shipping an empty directory, but I don't > think that is a good long term solution. It requires that gem packagers > to know that rdoc behaves in a certain way when provided with a > directory that doesn't exist, and to ship an empty directory to avoid > that warning. > > Instead, I would rather see this validation removed so that I can > specify an empty list of require paths and avoid this warning. > > I've put together a patch, but I'm not sure that it's complete. Without > applying the patch, I get errors running 1.8.7. The errors and failures > do not seem to increase after applying my patch, but I cannot be sure > I've not broken something. > > https://gist.github.com/1065473 > > -- > Aaron Patterson > http://tenderlovemaking.com/ > _______________________________________________ > Rubygems-developers mailing list > http://rubyforge.org/projects/rubygems > Rubygems-developers@rubyforge.org (mailto:Rubygems-developers@rubyforge.org) > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers _______________________________________________ Rubygems-developers mailing list http://rubyforge.org/projects/rubygems Rubygems-developers@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/rubygems-developers
