[aur-general] Packaging ruby gems
anatoly at posteo.net
Sun Aug 9 20:59:30 UTC 2020
I need feedback on packaging ruby gems.
First, I don't think packaging every gem of the latest version makes a
lot of sense. For development there are rvm/rbenv/etc that solve this
problem. The only gems need to package (I think) are gems that are
required by end-user applications. But such applications may require
gems not of the latest versions. So, there are several options here.
1) Bundle dependencies in the application itself. I don't like this
approach at all, since the package begins providing a lot of unnecessary
gems. Example: ruby-gollum-lib .
2) Package dependency gems only of versions required by the application.
For example, gollum-lib gem requires loofah ~2.3 (which means >= 2.3 and
< 2.4). The latest version of loofah is 2.6.0. So naming package
ruby-loofah of version 2.3.1 for gollum-lib may entails rightly flagging
it as out of date.
3) Packaging versioned gems. In previous example the package will be
called ruby-loofah-2_3 (or something) and add "provides" in PKGBUILD. It
is not forbidden by package guidelines (but not encouraged either) as
far as I remember.
4) Not package ruby gems at all.
I don't like neither of these options, but I think packaging versioned
gems is lesser evil.
What are your thoughts?
More information about the aur-general