On Wed, Apr 23, 2025 at 02:12:32PM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote:
>
> On 23/04/2025 1:49 pm, Soren Stoutner wrote:
> > The thought process with the name is that this package is only useful
> > to rails. It can’t be used generally by other Ruby packages.
> >
> > Upstream is propshaft inside of the
On 23/04/2025 1:49 pm, Soren Stoutner wrote:
The thought process with the name is that this package is only useful
to rails. It can’t be used generally by other Ruby packages.
Upstream is propshaft inside of the rails project.
Only golang follows that convention because you have to also impo
The thought process with the name is that this package is only useful
to rails. It can’t be used generally by other Ruby packages.
Upstream is propshaft inside of the rails project.
https://github.com/rails/propshaft
However, if there is a general consensus that this should be named
ruby-prop
Package: ruby-rails-propshaft
Version: 1.1.0-3
Severity: important
X-Debbugs-Cc: prav...@debian.org
Dear Maintainer,
Usually all rubygems get a ruby-prefixed to the gem name. Any reason to deviate
from the standard?
I think it'd be better if this package also followed the standard practice of
ru
4 matches
Mail list logo
