[scl.org] rubygems 2.2.0 in ruby scl

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 15.9.2014 17:13, Joe Rafaniello napsal(a):
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> Dne 15.9.2014 16:45, Joe Rafaniello napsal(a):
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> Dne 15.9.2014 15:52, Joe Rafaniello napsal(a):
>>>>>> However, I am wondering why you should be interested in RubyGems 2.2
>>>>>> just due to this specific change?
>>>>>> <\quote>
>>>>> Yes, the more compatible with upstream ruby/rubygems/bundler, the easier
>>>>> it
>>>>> is for applications, especially ones that support multiple platforms.
>>>> I thought it will be actually Bundler related, that is why I am asking.
>>>> So what are you actually missing? Would be an update of Bundler option
>>>> for you? That seems more feasible to me, although I have not checked if
>>>> really possible.
>>>>
>>>> Vít
>>>>
>>> I am researching what is required to get SCL ruby 2.0 to work with the
>>> rubygems.org based gems.
>>> In other words, is there some combination of rubygems.org based gems that I
>>> can use with SCL ruby 2.0/rubygems 2.0.14 without requiring the gems be
>>> patched in rpms?
>>>
>>> I'm fine with upgrading bundler to 1.7.2 from rubygems.org if the binary
>>> extensions fix is also available there.
>>>
>>> I was under the impression the upstream fix landed only in rubygems itself:
>>> http://blog.rubygems.org/2013/12/26/2.2.0-released.html
>>>
>>> And with that change, the packaged bundler would no longer require a patch
>>> for binary extensions.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>> Well, we have Bundler which works with ruby200 available in ror40
>> collection. And that should just work with gems from rubygems.org. Is
>> that enough for you? Or you don't use ror40 collection for some reason?
> Yes, that would work if I can pick and choose what I want from ror40 including bundler, but not be required to install rails 4.0.

Of course you can do just "yum install ror40-rubygem-bundler" and you'll
get just Bundler, nothing else, unless there is error ;)

> We'd rather just use the SCL for core ruby and let bundler handle the rest since our users/developers can be on rhel, centos, fedora, ubuntu, osx, etc.
>
>> One option might be to move Bundler from ror40 collection to ruby200
>> collection and that would be something similar to what we did in RHEL7,
>> i.e. there is provided just Ruby and Bundler, nothing more.
>>
> Yes, I think that would be a good idea.  I can see developers wanting to use sinatra, padrino, or just ruby but want to use bundler for dependency management.

Would you mind opening RFE in our Bugzilla requesting this change? I
can't promise you anything, but we should definitely consider this.

Thanks


Vít