Duplicate review request for rubygem-vagrant

[Josef Stribny]

>>>> What prevails between the ruby naming guidelines and  the "prior art"
>>>> rule (other distros package name) in the general naming guidelines ?
>>>>
>>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:NamingGuidelines#General_Naming 
>>>>
>>>> http://packages.ubuntu.com/raring/vagrant
>>>> http://packages.debian.org/stable/vagrant
>>>>
>>>>
>>> And how vagrant differs from rhc and other client command line tools 
>>> that
>>> are distributed as gems and follow this convention?
>> I am wondering if you are being sarcastic. If not, please do not mind
>> this answer.
I am indeed very sarcastic person, but this time it's just my genuine 
question.
I wrote this as I don't use vagrant, so I don't know. I just want to see 
some consistence.

> There is more examples of Ruby packages, such as deltacloud-core, 
> puppet, which don't use the rubygem-prefix. The question is if vagrant 
> is application or library.
>
> If it is application, then it should be without rubygem- prefix and 
> should not install into rubygems directory. If that is library, then 
> it should have the rubygem- prefix and install among other rubygems. 
> But the border might be fuzzy.
Many RubyGems are both libs and programs, aren't they?