On 12/22/2011 11:19 AM, Scott Seago wrote:
On 12/22/2011 09:09 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>> - In the Rubygems section:
>>
>> "For every dependency on a Gem named|gemdep|, the package must contain
a|Requires| on|rubygem(%{gemdep})| with the same version constraints as the Gem"
>>
>> Can this be a "should" or can we append a "where possible"
onto the end of this. I've run into situations in the past where the constraints on
the upstream gem are too restrictive, and infact the gem will work with a more lax gem set
which we ship in Fedora
>
> You are right. We should not be as strict. Actually, I believe that
> we should not use version unless necessary. We will try to polish
> this formulation according to your suggestion.
Actually, we need to be very careful here. We've been bitten in the
past by creating RPMs with deps that don't strictly follow the gem
deps, since you then have a gem installed that, strictly speaking,
doesn't meet its gem dep requirements. If you end up using bundler for
something, it's going to complain. We had a big problem with this when
we had an RPM for which the underlying gem required rspec (2.0+), but
we required the rspec sub-packages instead.
Scott
Ah good point. Actually now that I think about it the guidelines could
use something to the effect of how to integrate bundler and other
alternative gem-dependency management into all of this (its been a royal
pain up to this point).
If nothing else, perhaps a guideline stating that if you modify the gem
dependency list in the rpm spec, you must ensure that it is modified in
bundler's Gemfile as well.
Actually expanding upon this, I'd love to see the work that Jay did with
making bundler usage toggleable in conductor, a more generic plugin,
able to be pulled into any project. Jay any thoughts on the feasibility
of this?
-Mo