Received: by 10.227.145.202 with SMTP id e10mr26158wbv.17.1280428269928;
        Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:31:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: ruby-bundler@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.216.68.149 with SMTP id l21ls1752765wed.3.p; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 
	11:31:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.162.15 with SMTP id x15mr36655wek.14.1280428268990;
        Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:31:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.162.15 with SMTP id x15mr36654wek.14.1280428268960;
        Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:31:08 -0700 (PDT)
Return-Path: <thewoolley...@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-ww0-f45.google.com (mail-ww0-f45.google.com [74.125.82.45])
        by gmr-mx.google.com with ESMTP id v4si365424weq.9.2010.07.29.11.31.07;
        Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of thewoolley...@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.45 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.45;
Authentication-Results: gmr-mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of thewoolley...@gmail.com designates 74.125.82.45 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=thewoolley...@gmail.com; dkim=pass (test mode) header...@gmail.com
Received: by wwf26 with SMTP id 26so581460wwf.2
        for <ruby-bundler@googlegroups.com>; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:31:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to
         :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type
         :content-transfer-encoding;
        bh=RQHqLo+e8gewlEx/cOvUQs4jB7hzN41FN8guT2uvtos=;
        b=D8+1GHyILQTbbZdFDw9iI5bgOFoDAXZIWakci4460/KAiNu0dy4hdeDki0uQpbdtr2
         TE7go7HeVY616TrfiXborgBhrmnLqJX3V7jt0e0+6tHEn+U+R/Crrrt0sj7qKJb+Ygg2
         ms7pXUbsR7vwN7s1kB4zWBQ+yvAcX+WCGvJHI=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=edNe3qm7bGiYLw0UpQ5OMY713cSm4xJ1Bfv8FTvAhV1tQebjtMgeErV/CpeLht/OHV
         fBvq2v4NfRjup0ihTS1LwWYdKZDxKAaNRoyiLT/IjodxYblzvsnDUqJpZu0W12ixfUsw
         qS/V3xeWjeMvfnAgc/aF79dxsATw1X7soQh38=
Received: by 10.227.133.66 with SMTP id e2mr554200wbt.132.1280428264318; Thu, 
	29 Jul 2010 11:31:04 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.136.32 with HTTP; Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:30:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi==ZvoVJO44QrjVfcNgopCyuNVAnT0oA4xsf...@mail.gmail.com>
References: <d94890eb-b868-4d21-9983-7cb675ad2...@i28g2000yqa.googlegroups.com> 
	<AANLkTi=dG_3sbqW6D02O-7H2rub-1Mr1WvyBvwtQh...@mail.gmail.com> 
	<ab101cd1-031b-4e93-aefb-8f253d8cc...@i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> 
	<c3373912-af48-4a01-aaf2-9258c9205...@w12g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> 
	<AANLkTik4QkJ_VXZpN22O-H3wy3VQCg6-c6c3JyHnG...@mail.gmail.com> 
	<AANLkTi==ZvoVJO44QrjVfcNgopCyuNVAnT0oA4xsf...@mail.gmail.com>
From: Chad Woolley <thewoolley...@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:30:44 -0700
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=85dy2JFyeWFKs74=6n=uoAVTiON4nDrxSL...@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why "bundler install" always ask me my root password?
To: ruby-bundler@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 11:34 AM, Stephen Eley <sfe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> My frustration here is that it's unnecessary. =A0It's *adding* a root
> constraint where none existed before! =A0Ruby itself doesn't force sudo.
> =A0If you're using a stock Ruby and you install a gem without sudo, it
> puts it in ~/.gem and everything still works. =A0As of 1.0rc, Ruby's
> basic defaults are more flexible than Bundler's.

I don't believe this is true.  Going forward, RubyGems will force you
to pass '--user-install' if you want to install to ~/.gem, and will
error if you try to install to a root-owned GEM_HOME without
specifying it.  In other words, '--no-user-install' is the default
(even though 1.3.7 gem install --help doesn't list it - this is a doc
bug).

So, stock RubyGems going forward DOES force sudo by default unless you
pass an option.

The point being - it isn't too crazy to expect non-development bundler
usage to require a special flag '--production', since you'd have to
pass something extra to 'gem install' in any case (either prefix with
sudo, or pass --user-install).  And if the current behavior is what
the Bundler devs have found to cause the minimal confusion and
complaints in development, it's probably best to keep it that way :)

-- Chad