hoodwink.d enhanced


Ruby Sucked Into Whirlpool, Some Dismemberment #

by why in cult

Don't mouseover this image EVER AGAIN. EV-ER.

We’re all so protective over our little jewel. We’ve got it in a climate-controlled room, nesting in a weave of white lasers, inches from the nostril fumes of invisible ninjas, tons of black magic is present, the Spy Hunter™ car is waiting over in the back of the unmarked van getting a refuel—and then Debian brought down the guillotine, huh?

The debacle is: Ruby has been cut up into 34ths by the Debian team. Paul van Tilburg has raised his hand to answer for Ruby on Debian. I act as the omnipresent and omniscience force that can say and do anything with no repercussions. (I’ve been drinking grape soda.)

I can’t say I always know what’s best for Debian. Daigo, help us out? The ruby-stdlib suggestion seems about right.

said on 26 Jan 2005 at 10:11

I do not understand the mentality behind Debian package management, or Linux in general for that matter. Stop trying to read my mind. You do not know what I want. I will worry about my own dependencies and disk space.

Very MS of them.

said on 26 Jan 2005 at 12:35

I don’t know what is “MS” about it. That’s why a lot is split up in Debian so choice is at the users side.

said on 26 Jan 2005 at 12:39

Yes, and that would be fine if we were talking about third-party Ruby libraries – but this is the standard library. The standard library is part of Ruby. This is rubbish and nonsense.

said on 26 Jan 2005 at 13:12

Yes, but I don’t want to have any Tk libs which is a consequence of having libtk-ruby (or one big ruby-stdlib package). I’m also thinking of the future where Ruby stdlib will grow an even larger dependency tree. Hence my proposal. But that’s all beside the point! I’m all with you here that something should change as I have pointed out. I don’t want to argue with people who wish the same, it’s… pointless.

said on 26 Jan 2005 at 13:40

Paul, I think this discussion is pertinent to non-Debian Rubyists as well, inasmuch as we have to explain to users why our software doesn’t work with their Ruby.

PHP is often separated into extensions in many package managers. But look at how PHP is packaged: it comes with many extensions, but very few of those are installed by the default ./configure settings. So, in PHP ’s case, no one complains about the fragmentation of the core distribution into various packages.

But with Ruby this seems like a baby and bath water dilemma. Sure, exclude stuff like Tk which has external dependencies. But leave in the stuff that is insular. We count on all that stuff.

Paul, are you the Debian-Ruby packager?

said on 26 Jan 2005 at 14:21

I agree completely. What also changed the case is that Ruby 1.6’s stdlib was almost all small pure Ruby libs and with 1.8 and probably more in the future is attracting solid good useful libs but with dependencies.

I am for easy installing of the bunch (apt-get install ruby, done with stdlib and all), but also want to keep the choice of not installing all because of depends, since there are more types of users using it all.

I am not the Debian Ruby packager. Those Fumitoshi UKAI and Akira YAMADA , which IMO are the two most relevant people for this discussion, but of whom I haven’t heard a thing about this since August, sadly.

I am trying to get a Debian Ruby project going, to make it all as good as Perl and Python is now in Debian. That is were my interests lie.

said on 27 Jan 2005 at 02:48

Here are the email addresses. There is already a debian-ruby mailing list. debian-ruby@lists.debian.org From my point of view the point is already well-established (from mailing list + history last year) that the current ruby split causes a lot of problems. And there is already proposed a good solution that solves all problems using a Debian virtual package, much like is already done with several others in Debian. So that you can opt to install less, but can default to more on the important top-level “convenience” packages which will be appropriate for most users. ukai@debian.or.jp emiel@il.fontys.nl

Cheers, -Rudi

said on 27 Jan 2005 at 10:01

Ruby is a little split up on Fedora Core 3 as well.

1) ruby 2) ruby-libs 3) irb 4) ri 5) ruby-docs 6) ruby-tcltk 7) ruby-mode (emacs syntax) 8) ruby-devel 9) ruby-debuginfo

Again it would be a nice thing to simply have “ruby” in all its glory when I do:

yum install ruby

rather than

yum search ruby yum install ruby* yum install ri yum install irb

said on 27 Jan 2005 at 10:04

Oi it lost my formating, each of the packages should be on its own line, same with the yum’s at the end …. grumble

said on 27 Jan 2005 at 11:08

Robert, did you use the preview button?

said on 27 Jan 2005 at 18:16

That would have been far to sensible _why :)

I do still wonder why it kept some formating but I guess it was becuase it had newlines between the short lines, where the others didn’t …

said on 06 Oct 2005 at 02:49

On FC4 ‘yum install ruby’ will install ruby and ruby-libs and ‘yum install ir’ will install ir and irb.

Comments are closed for this entry.