[katello-devel] Bundler vs rpm-gems

[Petr Chalupa]

This would give you only a production dependencies but not the 
development one. Imho it would not work.

Petr

On 22.08.12 16:37, Dmitri Dolguikh wrote:
> On 22/08/12 03:28 PM, Petr Chalupa wrote:
>> We already discussed solution with Gemfile.lock. There are issues.
>>
>> - You would have to have Gemfile.lock for f16, f17, el62, el63
>> - You would habe to have Gemfile.lock for production and development
>> - You will have update it every time when some version of gem or rpm
>> change in some of f16, f17, el62, el63
>
> Hmmm. What if we bundled dependencies when we are tagging for a specific
> platform (and stripped them when packaging into rpm)? Troubleshooting
> would be quite simple then - we could even look at rhel issues on fedora...
>
> -d
>
>>
>>
>> It seems to me quite clumsy.
>>
>> Petr
>>
>> On 22.08.12 16:14, Lukas Zapletal wrote:
>>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 09:49:06AM -0400, Hugh Brock wrote:
>>>> FWIW, our Gemfile.lock is in git. We don't accept changes to it without
>>>> patch review, etc. etc. Seems to work reasonably well.
>>>
>>> Our first experience was not that good, but truth is, now we do use
>>> github.com and pull requests. On the other hand, the lock file looks
>>> very messy. You guys are able to track it all?
>>>
>>> The general rule could be - no changes at all except adding new
>>> dependencies (after discussion on the list of course :-)
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> katello-devel mailing list
>> katello-devel at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/katello-devel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> katello-devel mailing list
> katello-devel at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/katello-devel