Re: default gems in ruby deployment

On 7/13/22 22:57, Andreas 'Segaja' Schleifer wrote: Hello, I have applied my patch and pushed the changes to [community-testing]. It would be nice if some people could test it and report back to me. If anyone has any points what we still should change in the package then please voice them.

Re: default gems in ruby deployment

Hello On 7/16/22 18:02, Anatol Pomozov wrote: Hi Thanks for the cleanup. The ruby itself works fine.  I have a few minor notes though. I see some packages (e.g. https://github.com/archlinux/svntogit-community/blob/packages/ruby-rexml/trunk/PKGBUILD

Re: default gems in ruby deployment

Hi Thanks for the cleanup. The ruby itself works fine. I have a few minor notes though. I see some packages (e.g. https://github.com/archlinux/svntogit-community/blob/packages/ruby-rexml/trunk/PKGBUILD) use gem tool during install() phase but the dependency is not specified in the dependency lis

Re: default gems in ruby deployment

Hi, I did some testing with the new packages, everything worked fine. I think we're fine moving them to Community. Cheers, Tim On 13.07.22 22:57, Andreas 'Segaja' Schleifer wrote: Hello, I have applied my patch and pushed the changes to [community-testing]. It would be nice if some people c

Re: default gems in ruby deployment

Hello, I have applied my patch and pushed the changes to [community-testing]. It would be nice if some people could test it and report back to me. If anyone has any points what we still should change in the package then please voice them. Best regards Andreas OpenPGP_signature Description

Re: default gems in ruby deployment

On 7/8/22 10:44, David Runge wrote: On 2022-07-02 13:07:38 (+0200), David Runge wrote: As there has been no negative feedback to this suggestion, I'd move ruby and rubygems to [community] tomorrow, so that work on the topic can commence. The packages are now moved and the updated package guide

Re: default gems in ruby deployment

On 2022-07-02 13:07:38 (+0200), David Runge wrote: > As there has been no negative feedback to this suggestion, I'd move > ruby and rubygems to [community] tomorrow, so that work on the topic > can commence. The packages are now moved and the updated package guidelines are in place: https://wiki.a

Re: default gems in ruby deployment

On 2022-06-24 22:47:04 (+0200), David Runge wrote: > Ruby does not seem to be directly required by anything in extra. E.g. > apparmor only carries it as an optional dependency. > So moving should not be an issue. @anatol what do you think? As there has been no negative feedback to this suggestion,

Re: default gems in ruby deployment

Hi all, sorry for the late reply. On 2022-06-14 21:18:18 (+0200), Andreas 'Segaja' Schleifer wrote: > As to the state of things and a patch for the PKGBUILD: > > I have a diff of the ruby PKGBUILD ready [0]. I’m adding another split > package to the mix called ruby-stdlib which is defining the d

Re: default gems in ruby deployment

Hi On Sun, Jun 19, 2022 at 8:43 AM Tim Meusel wrote: > Hi, > > On 14.06.22 21:18, Andreas 'Segaja' Schleifer wrote: > > On 6/14/22 10:17, David Runge wrote: > >> Hi Andreas, > >> > >> first off: Thanks for looking into this! I guess not all of the > >> packagers knows how complicated and time-c

Re: default gems in ruby deployment

Hi, On 14.06.22 21:18, Andreas 'Segaja' Schleifer wrote: On 6/14/22 10:17, David Runge wrote: Hi Andreas, first off: Thanks for looking into this! I guess not all of the packagers knows how complicated and time-consuming packaging ruby can be. On 2022-06-01 23:05:45 (+0200), Andreas 'Segaja'

Re: default gems in ruby deployment

On 6/14/22 10:17, David Runge wrote: Hi Andreas, first off: Thanks for looking into this! I guess not all of the packagers knows how complicated and time-consuming packaging ruby can be. On 2022-06-01 23:05:45 (+0200), Andreas 'Segaja' Schleifer wrote: The problem is that in order to get this

Re: default gems in ruby deployment

Hi Andreas, first off: Thanks for looking into this! I guess not all of the packagers knows how complicated and time-consuming packaging ruby can be. On 2022-06-01 23:05:45 (+0200), Andreas 'Segaja' Schleifer wrote: > The problem is that in order to get this fully working we need to package > all

Re: default gems in ruby deployment

Hi! On 01.06.22 23:05, Andreas 'Segaja' Schleifer wrote: On 6/1/22 20:31, Anatol Pomozov wrote: Hello Andreas Thank you for your research. The standard gems are indeed a source of confusion both in Ruby distribution and in Arch packages. One thing that could really help here is a working p

Re: default gems in ruby deployment

On 6/1/22 20:31, Anatol Pomozov wrote: Hello Andreas Thank you for your research. The standard gems are indeed a source of confusion both in Ruby distribution and in Arch packages. One thing that could really help here is a working proposal with a patch to PKGBUILD. If you can come up with

Re: default gems in ruby deployment

Hello Andreas Thank you for your research. The standard gems are indeed a source of confusion both in Ruby distribution and in Arch packages. One thing that could really help here is a working proposal with a patch to PKGBUILD. If you can come up with one please file an arch bug and share it wit