Ironruby core - Feb 2009 - Recommendations for (IronRuby) gem packaging ?

Hi,
I''m thinking about packaging some gems from github.

So I''m wondering if it already possible to package a gem so that:
1 - it is marked as compatible *only* with IronRuby ?
2 - it is marked as compatible also with IronRuby (as well as other
platforms) ?

What would be the platform indication ?

I''m also looking for any other useful information from people who tried
to
package an IronRuby gem.

cheers and thanks for any feedback,

-- Thibaut
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20090228/d3a8fd8f/attachment.html>

Hi Thibaut,

AFAIK there is no way (yet) to enforce the compatibility of a gem with
one or more ruby implementations, e.g. mri, jruby, ironruby, etc. If
I''m not going wrong there was a discussion a while back on ruby-talk
about the necessity of extending the current gemspec with a new
attribute to meet this kind of requirement as the existing "platform"
attribute was not intended for something like this and, in fact, it is
not quite the same.

I was thinking of packaging my ironruby-hpricot as a gem for ironruby
(btw the source is hosted on github, see
http://github.com/nrk/ironruby-hpricot/ ... never had the chance to
announce it :-)) but I guess it is too early as ironruby''s internals
seem to be still a "moving target" (I had to push a few fixes last
week due to changes).


On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 11:29, Thibaut Barr?re
<thibaut.barrere at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I''m thinking about packaging some gems from github.
> So I''m wondering if it already possible to package a gem so that:
> 1 - it is marked as compatible *only* with IronRuby ?
> 2 - it is marked as compatible also with IronRuby (as well as other
> platforms) ?
> What would be the platform indication ?
> I''m also looking for any other useful information from people who
tried to
> package an IronRuby gem.
> cheers and thanks for any feedback,
> -- Thibaut

-- 
Daniele Alessandri
http://www.clorophilla.net/blog/

Hi Daniele,
nice to see your work on HPricot - I wasn''t aware of that. That will be
totally useful :)

thanks for your reply - I guess I''ll remain in pure code on github
until
things are sorted out.

thanks!

-- Thibaut
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20090228/58fa74e1/attachment.html>

Isn''t "platform" used to identify a gem as a JRuby gem?
Granted, it''s not perfect, but having IronRuby gems set the platform to
"ironruby" would seem to make sense with the current state of
rubygems. Is there a reason not to do this, and (other than waiting for changes
to rubygems) is there a better way to accomplish this?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto:ironruby-core-
> bounces at rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Daniele Alessandri
> Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 6:34 AM
> To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] Recommendations for (IronRuby) gem
> packaging ?
> 
> Hi Thibaut,
> 
> AFAIK there is no way (yet) to enforce the compatibility of a gem with
> one or more ruby implementations, e.g. mri, jruby, ironruby, etc. If
> I''m not going wrong there was a discussion a while back on
ruby-talk
> about the necessity of extending the current gemspec with a new
> attribute to meet this kind of requirement as the existing
"platform"
> attribute was not intended for something like this and, in fact, it is
> not quite the same.
> 
> I was thinking of packaging my ironruby-hpricot as a gem for ironruby
> (btw the source is hosted on github, see
> http://github.com/nrk/ironruby-hpricot/ ... never had the chance to
> announce it :-)) but I guess it is too early as ironruby''s
internals
> seem to be still a "moving target" (I had to push a few fixes
last
> week due to changes).
> 
> 
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 11:29, Thibaut Barr?re
> <thibaut.barrere at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > I''m thinking about packaging some gems from github.
> > So I''m wondering if it already possible to package a gem so
that:
> > 1 - it is marked as compatible *only* with IronRuby ?
> > 2 - it is marked as compatible also with IronRuby (as well as other
> > platforms) ?
> > What would be the platform indication ?
> > I''m also looking for any other useful information from people
who
> tried to
> > package an IronRuby gem.
> > cheers and thanks for any feedback,
> > -- Thibaut
> 
> 
> --
> Daniele Alessandri
> http://www.clorophilla.net/blog/
> _______________________________________________
> Ironruby-core mailing list
> Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core

>
> Isn''t "platform" used to identify a gem as a JRuby gem?
Granted, it''s not
> perfect, but having IronRuby gems set the platform to "ironruby"
would seem
> to make sense with the current state of rubygems. Is there a reason not to
> do this, and (other than waiting for changes to rubygems) is there a better
> way to accomplish this?

I think it is - although I''m no expert here.

As well, I''m not sure what setting the "platform" actually
implies.

For instance, I have developed gems that target the MRI. I''m thinking
about
adding native support for IronRuby. One example is diacritics_fu (
http://github.com/thbar/diacritics_fu/tree/master) that removes accents from
strings. Under .Net, I can achieve that natively using encoding stuff. So
basically this gem would become usable under both MRI and IronRuby, it just
doesn''t use the same underlying stuff depending on who is using it.

I anticipate that more and more gems could face this situation.

I''m not sure how to define the platform in these cases.

raw thoughts...

-- Thibaut




>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ironruby-core-bounces at rubyforge.org [mailto:ironruby-core-
> > bounces at rubyforge.org] On Behalf Of Daniele Alessandri
> > Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 6:34 AM
> > To: ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> > Subject: Re: [Ironruby-core] Recommendations for (IronRuby) gem
> > packaging ?
> >
> > Hi Thibaut,
> >
> > AFAIK there is no way (yet) to enforce the compatibility of a gem with
> > one or more ruby implementations, e.g. mri, jruby, ironruby, etc. If
> > I''m not going wrong there was a discussion a while back on
ruby-talk
> > about the necessity of extending the current gemspec with a new
> > attribute to meet this kind of requirement as the existing
"platform"
> > attribute was not intended for something like this and, in fact, it is
> > not quite the same.
> >
> > I was thinking of packaging my ironruby-hpricot as a gem for ironruby
> > (btw the source is hosted on github, see
> > http://github.com/nrk/ironruby-hpricot/ ... never had the chance to
> > announce it :-)) but I guess it is too early as ironruby''s
internals
> > seem to be still a "moving target" (I had to push a few
fixes last
> > week due to changes).
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 11:29, Thibaut Barr?re
> > <thibaut.barrere at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > > I''m thinking about packaging some gems from github.
> > > So I''m wondering if it already possible to package a gem
so that:
> > > 1 - it is marked as compatible *only* with IronRuby ?
> > > 2 - it is marked as compatible also with IronRuby (as well as
other
> > > platforms) ?
> > > What would be the platform indication ?
> > > I''m also looking for any other useful information from
people who
> > tried to
> > > package an IronRuby gem.
> > > cheers and thanks for any feedback,
> > > -- Thibaut
> >
> >
> > --
> > Daniele Alessandri
> > http://www.clorophilla.net/blog/
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ironruby-core mailing list
> > Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> > http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
> _______________________________________________
> Ironruby-core mailing list
> Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20090316/de392566/attachment.html>

2009/3/16 Thibaut Barr?re <thibaut.barrere at gmail.com>:
>> Isn''t "platform" used to identify a gem as a JRuby
gem? Granted, it''s not
>> perfect, but having IronRuby gems set the platform to
"ironruby" would seem
>> to make sense with the current state of rubygems. Is there a reason not
to
>> do this, and (other than waiting for changes to rubygems) is there a
better
>> way to accomplish this?
>
> I think it is - although I''m no expert here.
Well it makes sense if we are speaking about a mere reminder that a
gem targets ironruby (it is not really that good, but there is no
other way to do that), but right now it is not possible to *enforce*
the compatibility with a specific ruby implementation and/or platform
(and this is what I was referring to).

By the way... yes, a few gems just use spec.platform to identify
themselves as jruby gems:

hpricot-0.6.164.gem
hpricot-0.6.164-mswin32.gem
hpricot-0.6.164-jruby.gem

Honestly, the fact that spec.platform was intended for different
purposes does not imply that we should not follow what seems the
de-facto way to overcome the current limits of gemspecs :-)
> As well, I''m not sure what setting the "platform"
actually implies.
http://rubygems.org/read/chapter/20#platform

"If this attribute is set to a non-default value, it will be included
in the filename of the gem when it is built, e.g.
fxruby-1.2.0-win32.gem.".

See also "gem help platforms"
> For instance, I have developed gems that target the MRI. I''m
thinking about
> adding native support for IronRuby. One example is diacritics_fu
> (http://github.com/thbar/diacritics_fu/tree/master) that removes accents
> from strings. Under .Net, I can achieve that natively using encoding
> stuff. So basically this gem would become usable under both MRI and
> IronRuby, it just doesn''t use the same underlying stuff depending
on who is
> using it.
In this case I would simply opt for two separate gems: diacritics_fu
(pure ruby) and diacritics_fu-ironruby. I don''t think that MRI guys
are actually interested in having .NET assemblies in their installed
gems :-)

-- 
Daniele Alessandri
http://www.clorophilla.net/blog/
http://twitter.com/JoL1hAHN