RPM and GEMS conflict of interest

[Gilles Dubreuil]

On Wed, 2010-06-23 at 10:22 +0100, Karanbir Singh wrote:
> On 23/06/2010 08:36, Gilles Dubreuil wrote:
> > I'm sorry if this discussion has been brought earlier but it doesn't
> > make sense for me.
> 
> RPMS and Gems target very different audiences. Gem's are a very badly
> thought out process to help developers get to specific code easily and
> quickly across different platforms. Things get even worse when you
> include components like 'bundler', and its back to 1990's with its
> static linking again.
> 
> RPMS on the other hand will always give you a better, managed and
> reproduceable environment. And this is across many levels, eg: I dont
> want to have mysql-devel, gcc and its whole stack installed on a machine
> just because i need ruby-mysql and the gem payload is native source.
> Then expand that to egg's for python, pecl for php, cpan for perl etc etc.
> 
> - KB

Do you mean RPMs are more system management oriented and GEMS more
application or development oriented? Maybe, from a sysadmin or developer
viewpoints.

What I see, from both practice views is the need to have multiple ruby
libraries directly into RPMs.

Regards,
Gil