Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon.
Switch to the new Google Groups.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
gemcutter
Home
+ new post
About this group
Join this group
Message from discussion gem yank prerelease
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Chad Woolley  
View profile  
 More options Mar 1 2010, 10:58 am
From: Chad Woolley <thewoolley...@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 08:58:51 -0700
Local: Mon, Mar 1 2010 10:58 am
Subject: Re: [gemcutter] Re: gem yank prerelease
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Nick Quaranto <n...@quaran.to> wrote:
> I need to mull this over a bit more, but I think this could be acceptable...
> 1) Gem yank allows you to quickly 'undo' a release. Since this wasn't
> possible before, you usually had to repush or ask us to remove it manually.
> 2) You're not going to run out of version numbers, and pushing is
> ridiculously fast.
> 3) We could take a SHA of the incoming .gem, and make sure on a new gem push
> that SHA hasn't been pushed, thereby enforcing atomic versions.
> 4) On a 'repush' we could display a message saying why and telling the user
> to bump the patch version, and the command to yank that version if need be.

+1

Good compromise.  Yes, versions are unlimited, and if you screwed up
the metadata, just bump, re-release, and write down the steps so you
don't screw up next time.  Allowing people to overwrite a version, for
any reason, is a bad idea...

I also like the compromise for deletion.  The only way to permanently
delete it is to ask you, and even in that case users should still have
a .gem file hanging around somewhere that they can republish on their
own.  As long as there is no re-push of same version, this will work
out fine.

Great job Nick and John!!!

Thanks,
-- Chad


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2012 Google