On Jul 7, 2010, at 11:11, James Tucker wrote:
> On 7 Jul 2010, at 17:17, Jeremy Hinegardner wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 04:36:43PM +0100, James Tucker wrote:
>>> Hi again,
>>>
>>> One of the things that has come up along the lines of research for better
>>> integration with system package ma
On 7 Jul 2010, at 17:17, Jeremy Hinegardner wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 04:36:43PM +0100, James Tucker wrote:
>> Hi again,
>>
>> One of the things that has come up along the lines of research for better
>> integration with system package managers is the idea of tracking rubygems
>> itself a
On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 04:36:43PM +0100, James Tucker wrote:
> Hi again,
>
> One of the things that has come up along the lines of research for better
> integration with system package managers is the idea of tracking rubygems
> itself as a dependency for gem code. Some package managers simply st
Hi again,
One of the things that has come up along the lines of research for better
integration with system package managers is the idea of tracking rubygems
itself as a dependency for gem code. Some package managers simply strip out
"require 'rubygems'" from 3rd party code, which in most cases
