Add information what "official mrbgems" is. #959

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into
from

Conversation

Projects
None yet
10 participants
@monaka
Contributor

monaka commented Mar 7, 2013

This issue related on #955, #956.

I think there are required to spell out what kind of mrbgems we regard as official mrbgems.

The acceptable conditions is just my opinion for now.
Are there something else to add?

@skandhas

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@skandhas

skandhas Mar 7, 2013

Contributor

The directory structure like this ?

  • mruby
    • mrbgems
      • mruby-math -> for ISO Ruby
      • mruby-printf
      • mruby-struct
      • mruby-time
      • ...
      • ext -> for ext (same or subset of CRuby)
      • mruby-array
      • mruby-string
      • mruby-struct
      • ...
Contributor

skandhas commented Mar 7, 2013

The directory structure like this ?

  • mruby
    • mrbgems
      • mruby-math -> for ISO Ruby
      • mruby-printf
      • mruby-struct
      • mruby-time
      • ...
      • ext -> for ext (same or subset of CRuby)
      • mruby-array
      • mruby-string
      • mruby-struct
      • ...
@mattn

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@mattn

mattn Mar 7, 2013

Contributor

+1 to @skandhas

Contributor

mattn commented Mar 7, 2013

+1 to @skandhas

@monaka

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@monaka

monaka Mar 7, 2013

Contributor

Actually I had not think about the directory structure yet. @skandhas's plan sounds good to me. 👍

Contributor

monaka commented Mar 7, 2013

Actually I had not think about the directory structure yet. @skandhas's plan sounds good to me. 👍

@matsumotory

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@matsumotory

matsumotory Mar 7, 2013

Member
Member

matsumotory commented Mar 7, 2013

@takahashim

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@takahashim

takahashim Mar 7, 2013

Contributor

IMHO, 'ext' is not good name for CRuby compatible (or subset) gems. I'm afraid few people think the word 'ext' means 'same or subset of CRuby.' (In CRuby, 'ext' usually means C-extension)

But if we use 'ext' not only as CRuby compatible gems, but also as some useful extensions that CRuby don't have, the name 'ext' is suited to it.

Contributor

takahashim commented Mar 7, 2013

IMHO, 'ext' is not good name for CRuby compatible (or subset) gems. I'm afraid few people think the word 'ext' means 'same or subset of CRuby.' (In CRuby, 'ext' usually means C-extension)

But if we use 'ext' not only as CRuby compatible gems, but also as some useful extensions that CRuby don't have, the name 'ext' is suited to it.

@mattn

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@mattn

mattn Mar 7, 2013

Contributor

@takahashim agreed

Contributor

mattn commented Mar 7, 2013

@takahashim agreed

@monaka

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@monaka

monaka Mar 7, 2013

Contributor

How about "enhancement"?

Contributor

monaka commented Mar 7, 2013

How about "enhancement"?

@ghost

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@ghost

ghost Mar 7, 2013

If you really want all methods defined on CRuby, the directory name should be "cruby" or "mri".

I don't want to have the methods which are rarely used on our mruby programs. What I need is a small but powerful subset of CRuby. So "ext" is okay for me.

ghost commented Mar 7, 2013

If you really want all methods defined on CRuby, the directory name should be "cruby" or "mri".

I don't want to have the methods which are rarely used on our mruby programs. What I need is a small but powerful subset of CRuby. So "ext" is okay for me.

@carsonmcdonald

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@carsonmcdonald

carsonmcdonald Mar 7, 2013

Member

What about naming it "compat" or "compatibility" that signifies compatibility with cruby?

Member

carsonmcdonald commented Mar 7, 2013

What about naming it "compat" or "compatibility" that signifies compatibility with cruby?

@masuidrive

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@masuidrive

masuidrive Mar 7, 2013

Contributor

👍 compat

Contributor

masuidrive commented Mar 7, 2013

👍 compat

@monaka

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@monaka

monaka Mar 7, 2013

Contributor

Hmm... exactly mruby is not CRuby compatible, but ISO Ruby compatible.
I feel "compatible" something vague.

Backing to the root. There is src/ext/ directory in master branch since e0d6430 ... oh, ancient.
I can't catch … 'src/ext/' directory is named for C-extension. Really?

So ... even if we might remember some people recalls C-extensions, we can use "ext/" for that directory.
This is my opinion.

Contributor

monaka commented Mar 7, 2013

Hmm... exactly mruby is not CRuby compatible, but ISO Ruby compatible.
I feel "compatible" something vague.

Backing to the root. There is src/ext/ directory in master branch since e0d6430 ... oh, ancient.
I can't catch … 'src/ext/' directory is named for C-extension. Really?

So ... even if we might remember some people recalls C-extensions, we can use "ext/" for that directory.
This is my opinion.

@monaka

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@monaka

monaka Mar 7, 2013

Contributor

Or... how about "supplements"?

Contributor

monaka commented Mar 7, 2013

Or... how about "supplements"?

@matz

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@matz

matz Mar 7, 2013

Member

I don't like the term "official" here. It should "bundled" at most.
Besides that, I have no merit to extract ext (or whatever) in the directory. All bundled gems should be equal.
Although I am nothing against naming convention such as "mruby-string-ext" etc.

Member

matz commented Mar 7, 2013

I don't like the term "official" here. It should "bundled" at most.
Besides that, I have no merit to extract ext (or whatever) in the directory. All bundled gems should be equal.
Although I am nothing against naming convention such as "mruby-string-ext" etc.

@monaka

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@monaka

monaka Mar 7, 2013

Contributor

I see "official" is not suitable. I +1 to "bundled".

Hmm... There is no difference between ext/ path prefixes and -ext name suffixes, I feel ......
In other words, I can say I have no objection using -ext name suffixes instead of ext/ . I have no particular around there to me.

Contributor

monaka commented Mar 7, 2013

I see "official" is not suitable. I +1 to "bundled".

Hmm... There is no difference between ext/ path prefixes and -ext name suffixes, I feel ......
In other words, I can say I have no objection using -ext name suffixes instead of ext/ . I have no particular around there to me.

@bovi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@bovi

bovi Mar 8, 2013

Member

+1 for no substructure. all GEMs should be equal from my point of view too. I'm actually worring about adding to many GEMs as officials into the mruby core. I think GEMs can evolve better if they are seperated. This said I still like having basic functionality like time, struct etc. in the core repository.

Member

bovi commented Mar 8, 2013

+1 for no substructure. all GEMs should be equal from my point of view too. I'm actually worring about adding to many GEMs as officials into the mruby core. I think GEMs can evolve better if they are seperated. This said I still like having basic functionality like time, struct etc. in the core repository.

@bovi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@bovi

bovi Mar 8, 2013

Member

Counterproposal

Instead of a directory structure which is called something like "iso-compat" and/or "mri-compat". We maintain build configuration files which contains list of GEMs. And these build configuration files are used in the following way by the user:

  • If you want full ISO compatibility please add these GEMs...
  • If you want full MRI compatibility please add these GEMs...

We could talk with @masuidrive if he could add something similar to

# add a single GEM
conf.gem 'mrbgems/mruby-time'

# add a GEM bundle
conf.bundle 'mrbgems/iso-compat'

So in this case the file mrbgems/iso-compat could be just a file with a list of GEM addresses. And all of these GEMs together are building up the feature "ISO compatibility". In this way we only maintain an index with existing GEMs. The GEMs itself will be maintained in their own repository (maybe under github.com/mruby or somewhere else).

Any thoughts?

Member

bovi commented Mar 8, 2013

Counterproposal

Instead of a directory structure which is called something like "iso-compat" and/or "mri-compat". We maintain build configuration files which contains list of GEMs. And these build configuration files are used in the following way by the user:

  • If you want full ISO compatibility please add these GEMs...
  • If you want full MRI compatibility please add these GEMs...

We could talk with @masuidrive if he could add something similar to

# add a single GEM
conf.gem 'mrbgems/mruby-time'

# add a GEM bundle
conf.bundle 'mrbgems/iso-compat'

So in this case the file mrbgems/iso-compat could be just a file with a list of GEM addresses. And all of these GEMs together are building up the feature "ISO compatibility". In this way we only maintain an index with existing GEMs. The GEMs itself will be maintained in their own repository (maybe under github.com/mruby or somewhere else).

Any thoughts?

@masuidrive

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@masuidrive

masuidrive Mar 8, 2013

Contributor

@bovi
It's good idea. I think name "gembox" or "gemset"

Contributor

masuidrive commented Mar 8, 2013

@bovi
It's good idea. I think name "gembox" or "gemset"

@monaka

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@monaka

monaka Mar 8, 2013

Contributor

@bovi, +1. @masuidrive, +1.
As "Bundled" is already used as "mrbgems distributed with the core."

Contributor

monaka commented Mar 8, 2013

@bovi, +1. @masuidrive, +1.
As "Bundled" is already used as "mrbgems distributed with the core."

@matsumotory

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@matsumotory

matsumotory Mar 9, 2013

Member

+1 🍣

Member

matsumotory commented Mar 9, 2013

+1 🍣

@bovi

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@bovi

bovi Mar 9, 2013

Member

🍣 for conf.gembox

Member

bovi commented Mar 9, 2013

🍣 for conf.gembox

@beoran

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@beoran

beoran Mar 9, 2013

I like the gembox idea. Especially I want the iso gembox, which should be based on ISO (ANSI) C!

beoran commented Mar 9, 2013

I like the gembox idea. Especially I want the iso gembox, which should be based on ISO (ANSI) C!

@masuidrive

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@masuidrive

masuidrive Mar 10, 2013

Contributor

I'll make conf.gembox.

Contributor

masuidrive commented Mar 10, 2013

I'll make conf.gembox.

@monaka

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@monaka

monaka Apr 9, 2013

Contributor

I should close it because this PR is too silly.

Contributor

monaka commented Apr 9, 2013

I should close it because this PR is too silly.

@monaka monaka closed this Apr 9, 2013

@bovi bovi referenced this pull request Apr 27, 2013

Merged

GemBox #1218

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment