> > On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 8:37 AM, David Chelimsky <dchelim...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:

> >> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 7:34 AM, John Trupiano <jtrupi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 4:24 AM, David Chelimsky <dchelim...@gmail.com

> >> > wrote:

> >> >> On Feb 28, 11:20 pm, Nick Quaranto <n...@quaran.to> wrote:
> >> >> > Hey folks, thanks to some great work from John Trupiano we now have
> >> >> > gem
> >> >> > yank
> >> >> > live on the site. I need to work on the API/Gem documentation on
> the
> >> >> > site
> >> >> > and help.rubygems, but it takes every concern we had during our
> >> >> > previous
> >> >> > discussions into account.

> >> >> > * yanked gems are de-indexed but still available for download.
> >> >> > example:http://staging.rubygems.org/gems/bills/versions/0.0.1
> >> >> > * if people still need their gems removed permanently from the site
> >> >> > we
> >> >> > can
> >> >> > do that, just with a support request.
> >> >> > * once all versions of a gem have been de-indexed, the namespace
> goes
> >> >> > up
> >> >> > for
> >> >> > grabs from the next user to push to it.

> >> >> > To play with it you'll need gemcutter 0.5.0.pre (gem install
> >> >> > gemcutter
> >> >> > --pre). Any feedback would be appreciated.

> >> >> Is there a means of un-yanking a yanked gem? Would it just be re-
> >> >> pushing it?

> >> > David, at this time, yes that will suit your purposes.  Though for
> what
> >> > it's
> >> > worth I'm not exactly a fan of how it works at this time.  Nick and I
> >> > talked
> >> > about adding a -f option that you'd have to pass to overwrite a gem
> >> > release,
> >> > but that has not been implemented yet.

> >> I think overwriting an existing release is a bad idea. Imagine the
> >> confusion when people say they're using foo-1.0.3, but some have the
> >> version released in January and the others in March.

> >> I haven't looked at the code related to yanking, but if whatever bit
> >> is getting flipped is outside the gem file, I'd like a means of
> >> flipping it back while keeping the existing gem as/is. Reasonable?
> >> Doable?

> > Certainly doable.  What does the API look like?
> > gem unyank?
> > gem yank --undo?

> I'd prefer a flag on "gem yank" over a new sub-command, so --undo is
> my pref of those two. Other options:

> gem yank --revert
> gem yank --rollback

> I'm sure there are others - looking for a name that would feel
> familiar to users. Maybe --undo is the clearest option. WDYT?

> > -John