Dne 28.2.2012 15:53, Rex Dieter napsal(a):
On 02/28/2012 05:39 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Yes, Ruby SIG is still against it, since there is known just one gem ATM
> which needs such treatment. Now I list several pros/cons:
> * It would allow ruby packages to follow the same steps as other
> * More overhead for maintainers.
> * More confusion for new-commers, since this approach is not know in
> Ruby community and there is no best way how to achieve it.
If this notion of building from source is not known in the ruby
community, I'd highly recommend everyone (fpc, the ruby sig, etc...)
help make them aware of how important that is.
Pleas do not be mistaken. We are not speaking about building gems from
sources. We are speaking about building from package manager output,
i.e. build gem from gem. It is like trying to rebuild RPM with some
applied patch from RPM (yes, I am not speaking about SRPM but about RPM
and that is not mistake). How will you do it? Yes, the RPM contains the
same metadata as there were in original spec + SRPM but how will you
reconstruct them? Would you suggest somebody to use this approach?