Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=668820 --- Comment #13 from Mamoru Tasaka <mtasaka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2011-07-11 10:13:46 EDT --- (In reply to comment #12) > (In reply to comment #11) > > In this way, people will have to once remove rubygem-rdoc every time they want > > to use the original rdoc and it seems unpleasant to me. > > Unpleasant, but IMO: > 1) This is the way how it will work if you build/install your own Ruby, Sorry but I cannot figure out what you are saying here. > so I > think Rubyists are used to it. Even now you loose the original rdoc executable > once you install the gem version of RDoc. I only talk about what happens on current Fedora packaging or rpms so I just ignore it when people install gem files outside Fedora's rpm by themselves. > 2) I don't think there will be high demand in using original RDoc once there is > installed the gem version. Are you aware about any specific reason why somebody > would like to? I don't recall it shortly, however other people may want. > 3) With RubyGems, there is always possibility to choose the executed version, > e.g. you can call "rdoc _3.6_ --version" if you have installed RDoc 3.8 and 3.6 > to use RDoc 3.6, Again this won't happen on Fedora (please base your talk on Fedora's rpms or Fedora's packaging) > so we can do something similar, i.e. rdoc _system_ or rdoc > _1.0.1_ I don't understand your logic here. - If you want to do rdoc _system_ or so, perhaps we need another patch, and I don't want to do such mess method. - And specifying rdoc _system_ or so will also require another patches on packages which has /usr/bin/rdoc as BR. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review