On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Brent Beer <brent.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > Ah, I thought you were arguing against different versions of ruby having > different gemsets!
> Different projects usually have their own gemset merely out of "just in > case" situations because it's so easy to manage and because they dont often > change but the versions may differ slightly between projects
> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If your using bundle to load your dependencies then why would you have >> gemsets. I understand each version of Ruby will have it's own gemset. Why >> do you need project level gemsets?
>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Brent Beer <brent.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Yes, I also work with ruby full time and have about 5 apps daily that I >>> switch between as well, and never run into this problem due to gemsets, as >>> is the case for the entire team (~9 people) that I work with.
>>> If we didnt have these gemsets we'd be in dependency hell with apps >>> ranging from 1.8.7 to 1.9.3 and everywhere in between.
>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> Every time someone on my team updates gems, or if I have to stand up a >>>> new development machine, or starting a new project. Frequently enough that >>>> a useless feature if I'm using bundler is not worth my time. I write Ruby >>>> full time and have many projects that I work on. This is a frequent issue >>>> for me.
>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Brent Beer <brent.b...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>> How many times do you need to reinstall gems?
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>> Yes but my time is not and so waiting to reinstall a bunch of gems is >>>>>> worth not having gem sets. >>>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 12:44 PM, "Richard K Jordan" <rjorda...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> I am not a fan of the duplication, but drive space is no longer >>>>>>> premium, so it hasn't grated enough to fix yet.
>>>>>>> Jeff Barczewski <jeff.barczew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> >If you project needs to be able to generate apps in all my rubies >>>>>>> (if one >>>>>>> >of its purposes is a generator) and be tested in each, then again >>>>>>> it means >>>>>>> >installing for each and every ruby.
>>>>>>> >Also when using bundler it did not have to reinstall the gems >>>>>>> locally for >>>>>>> >each app, if it could find the appropriate versions in my gempaths, >>>>>>> so I >>>>>>> >didn't need as much duplication across all my apps, it would just >>>>>>> use the >>>>>>> >right gem already available..
>>>>>>> >Maybe I am the only one who ever had these issues or disliked all >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> >duplication :-)
>>>>>>> >On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> >> Run the version you want when starting the app. Or create a >>>>>>> gemfile first. >>>>>>> >> On Apr 9, 2012 12:06 PM, "Jeff Barczewski" < >>>>>>> jeff.barczew...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>> For apps, I agree, using bundler is great.
>>>>>>> >>> However you do often need some gems installed before you drop >>>>>>> into >>>>>>> >>> working in an app, for instance you need to run rails to >>>>>>> generate an app, >>>>>>> >>> so you often need certain things installed before you jump into >>>>>>> working in >>>>>>> >>> an app.
>>>>>>> >>> So it is for these things that you need outside of an app that >>>>>>> gemsets >>>>>>> >>> are nice (but duplicated in every ruby I would use).
>>>>>>> >>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Amos King wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>> Use bundler and not gemsets was my suggestion. >>>>>>> >>>> On Apr 9, 2012 12:00 PM, "Jeff Barczewski" < >>>>>>> jeff.barczew...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> >>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>>> I don't know if anyone is interested, but as an experiment, I >>>>>>> created a >>>>>>> >>>>> replacement for rvm (called brb, which is short for Bundled >>>>>>> Rubies or >>>>>>> >>>>> Bundled Ruby) that allowed you to install arbitrary rubies, >>>>>>> and gemsets >>>>>>> >>>>> using bundler and it supported the idea of sharing gems across >>>>>>> projects (so >>>>>>> >>>>> you woudn't need to have multiple copies even across rubies if >>>>>>> they were >>>>>>> >>>>> pure ruby). It leveraged having multiple ruby gemset_paths. It >>>>>>> worked more >>>>>>> >>>>> like bundler in the fact that you would specify things you >>>>>>> want (all the >>>>>>> >>>>> rubies and gemsets) then run build and it would go out and >>>>>>> build everything >>>>>>> >>>>> for you.
>>>>>>> >>>>> I had done this because I didn't like how RVM worked >>>>>>> (duplicating so >>>>>>> >>>>> many gems) and how complicated the code was (I was trying to >>>>>>> find a bug >>>>>>> >>>>> buried in nested undocumented shell scripts with no tests).
>>>>>>> >>>>> I got it all working but was going to go back and refactor into >>>>>>> >>>>> something nicer, but also realized that I was using a feature >>>>>>> in bash >>>>>>> >>>>> called associated arrays which was added in bash version 4 >>>>>>> which has been >>>>>>> >>>>> out for a while, but the default Mac OS X was bash 3, so this >>>>>>> was not ideal >>>>>>> >>>>> (especially considering the number of Mac users using ruby).
>>>>>>> >>>>> It was after this that I switched to node.js development and >>>>>>> didn't >>>>>>> >>>>> work on it much since.
>>>>>>> >>>>> If anyone is interested I could put it up on github, but I >>>>>>> haven't had >>>>>>> >>>>> time to refine it and/or figure out what to do with converting >>>>>>> from >>>>>>> >>>>> associated arrays (if it was to be able to use on Mac OS X >>>>>>> without >>>>>>> >>>>> upgrading bash).
>>>>>>> >>>>> All the best,
>>>>>>> >>>>> Jeff
>>>>>>> >>>>> On Monday, 9 April 2012 11:00:05 UTC-5, Michael Bishop wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>>>> Bundler is essential and if you work on multiple projects, >>>>>>> there is >>>>>>> >>>>>> virtually no way to get around multiple copies of gems on >>>>>>> your machine. >>>>>>> >>>>>> Gemsests + RVM help keep conflicts down.
>>>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>> Google >>>>>>> >>>>> Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>> >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>> >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/stlruby/-/Kn_hpg4uzsIJ. >>>>>>> >>>>> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>> >>>>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> >>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>> >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>> >>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>> Google >>>>>>> >>>> Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>> >>>> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>> >>>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>> >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>> >>> -- >>>>>>> >>> Jeff Barczewski >>>>>>> >>> Inspired Horizons >>>>>>> >>> http://inspiredhorizons.com/ >>>>>>> >>> Professional Software Craftsmanship
>>>>>>> >>> -- >>>>>>> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>> Google Groups >>>>>>> >>> "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>> >>> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>> >>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> >>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>> >>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>> >> -- >>>>>>> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>> Google Groups >>>>>>> >> "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>> >> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>> >> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> >> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>> >> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>> >-- >>>>>>> >You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>> >To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> >To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> >For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>> Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>> -- >>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>> Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com> wrote: > The dependency issues should be handled by bundler and shouldn't matter > for you.
> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Brent Beer <brent.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ah, I thought you were arguing against different versions of ruby having >> different gemsets!
>> Different projects usually have their own gemset merely out of "just in >> case" situations because it's so easy to manage and because they dont often >> change but the versions may differ slightly between projects
>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> If your using bundle to load your dependencies then why would you have >>> gemsets. I understand each version of Ruby will have it's own gemset. Why >>> do you need project level gemsets?
>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Brent Beer <brent.b...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> Yes, I also work with ruby full time and have about 5 apps daily that I >>>> switch between as well, and never run into this problem due to gemsets, as >>>> is the case for the entire team (~9 people) that I work with.
>>>> If we didnt have these gemsets we'd be in dependency hell with apps >>>> ranging from 1.8.7 to 1.9.3 and everywhere in between.
>>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>> Every time someone on my team updates gems, or if I have to stand up a >>>>> new development machine, or starting a new project. Frequently enough that >>>>> a useless feature if I'm using bundler is not worth my time. I write Ruby >>>>> full time and have many projects that I work on. This is a frequent issue >>>>> for me.
>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Brent Beer <brent.b...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>> How many times do you need to reinstall gems?
>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>> Yes but my time is not and so waiting to reinstall a bunch of gems >>>>>>> is worth not having gem sets. >>>>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 12:44 PM, "Richard K Jordan" <rjorda...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I am not a fan of the duplication, but drive space is no longer >>>>>>>> premium, so it hasn't grated enough to fix yet.
>>>>>>>> Jeff Barczewski <jeff.barczew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >If you project needs to be able to generate apps in all my rubies >>>>>>>> (if one >>>>>>>> >of its purposes is a generator) and be tested in each, then again >>>>>>>> it means >>>>>>>> >installing for each and every ruby.
>>>>>>>> >Also when using bundler it did not have to reinstall the gems >>>>>>>> locally for >>>>>>>> >each app, if it could find the appropriate versions in my >>>>>>>> gempaths, so I >>>>>>>> >didn't need as much duplication across all my apps, it would just >>>>>>>> use the >>>>>>>> >right gem already available..
>>>>>>>> >Maybe I am the only one who ever had these issues or disliked all >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> >duplication :-)
>>>>>>>> >On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >> Run the version you want when starting the app. Or create a >>>>>>>> gemfile first. >>>>>>>> >> On Apr 9, 2012 12:06 PM, "Jeff Barczewski" < >>>>>>>> jeff.barczew...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>> For apps, I agree, using bundler is great.
>>>>>>>> >>> However you do often need some gems installed before you drop >>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>> >>> working in an app, for instance you need to run rails to >>>>>>>> generate an app, >>>>>>>> >>> so you often need certain things installed before you jump into >>>>>>>> working in >>>>>>>> >>> an app.
>>>>>>>> >>> So it is for these things that you need outside of an app that >>>>>>>> gemsets >>>>>>>> >>> are nice (but duplicated in every ruby I would use).
>>>>>>>> >>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Amos King wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>> Use bundler and not gemsets was my suggestion. >>>>>>>> >>>> On Apr 9, 2012 12:00 PM, "Jeff Barczewski" < >>>>>>>> jeff.barczew...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> >>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>> I don't know if anyone is interested, but as an experiment, I >>>>>>>> created a >>>>>>>> >>>>> replacement for rvm (called brb, which is short for Bundled >>>>>>>> Rubies or >>>>>>>> >>>>> Bundled Ruby) that allowed you to install arbitrary rubies, >>>>>>>> and gemsets >>>>>>>> >>>>> using bundler and it supported the idea of sharing gems >>>>>>>> across projects (so >>>>>>>> >>>>> you woudn't need to have multiple copies even across rubies >>>>>>>> if they were >>>>>>>> >>>>> pure ruby). It leveraged having multiple ruby gemset_paths. >>>>>>>> It worked more >>>>>>>> >>>>> like bundler in the fact that you would specify things you >>>>>>>> want (all the >>>>>>>> >>>>> rubies and gemsets) then run build and it would go out and >>>>>>>> build everything >>>>>>>> >>>>> for you.
>>>>>>>> >>>>> I had done this because I didn't like how RVM worked >>>>>>>> (duplicating so >>>>>>>> >>>>> many gems) and how complicated the code was (I was trying to >>>>>>>> find a bug >>>>>>>> >>>>> buried in nested undocumented shell scripts with no tests).
>>>>>>>> >>>>> I got it all working but was going to go back and refactor >>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>> >>>>> something nicer, but also realized that I was using a feature >>>>>>>> in bash >>>>>>>> >>>>> called associated arrays which was added in bash version 4 >>>>>>>> which has been >>>>>>>> >>>>> out for a while, but the default Mac OS X was bash 3, so this >>>>>>>> was not ideal >>>>>>>> >>>>> (especially considering the number of Mac users using ruby).
>>>>>>>> >>>>> It was after this that I switched to node.js development and >>>>>>>> didn't >>>>>>>> >>>>> work on it much since.
>>>>>>>> >>>>> If anyone is interested I could put it up on github, but I >>>>>>>> haven't had >>>>>>>> >>>>> time to refine it and/or figure out what to do with >>>>>>>> converting from >>>>>>>> >>>>> associated arrays (if it was to be able to use on Mac OS X >>>>>>>> without >>>>>>>> >>>>> upgrading bash).
>>>>>>>> >>>>> All the best,
>>>>>>>> >>>>> Jeff
>>>>>>>> >>>>> On Monday, 9 April 2012 11:00:05 UTC-5, Michael Bishop wrote:
>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Bundler is essential and if you work on multiple projects, >>>>>>>> there is >>>>>>>> >>>>>> virtually no way to get around multiple copies of gems on >>>>>>>> your machine. >>>>>>>> >>>>>> Gemsests + RVM help keep conflicts down.
>>>>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>> Google >>>>>>>> >>>>> Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>> >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>> >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/stlruby/-/Kn_hpg4uzsIJ. >>>>>>>> >>>>> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com >>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>> >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>> >>>>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> >>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>> >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>> >>>> -- >>>>>>>> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>> Google >>>>>>>> >>>> Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>> >>>> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>> >>>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>> >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>> >>> -- >>>>>>>> >>> Jeff Barczewski >>>>>>>> >>> Inspired Horizons >>>>>>>> >>> http://inspiredhorizons.com/ >>>>>>>> >>> Professional Software Craftsmanship
>>>>>>>> >>> -- >>>>>>>> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>> Google Groups >>>>>>>> >>> "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>> >>> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>> >>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> >>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>> >>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>> >> -- >>>>>>>> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>> Google Groups >>>>>>>> >> "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>> >> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>> >> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> >> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>> >> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>> >-- >>>>>>>> >You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>> Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>> >To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> >To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> >For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>>>>> Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> I personally believe that the bike shed looks better blue.
> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The dependency issues should be handled by bundler and shouldn't matter >> for you.
>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Brent Beer <brent.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Ah, I thought you were arguing against different versions of ruby having >>> different gemsets!
>>> Different projects usually have their own gemset merely out of "just in >>> case" situations because it's so easy to manage and because they dont often >>> change but the versions may differ slightly between projects
>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> If your using bundle to load your dependencies then why would you have >>>> gemsets. I understand each version of Ruby will have it's own gemset. Why >>>> do you need project level gemsets?
>>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Brent Beer <brent.b...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>> Yes, I also work with ruby full time and have about 5 apps daily that >>>>> I switch between as well, and never run into this problem due to gemsets, >>>>> as is the case for the entire team (~9 people) that I work with.
>>>>> If we didnt have these gemsets we'd be in dependency hell with apps >>>>> ranging from 1.8.7 to 1.9.3 and everywhere in between.
>>>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>> Every time someone on my team updates gems, or if I have to stand up >>>>>> a new development machine, or starting a new project. Frequently enough >>>>>> that a useless feature if I'm using bundler is not worth my time. I write >>>>>> Ruby full time and have many projects that I work on. This is a frequent >>>>>> issue for me.
>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Brent Beer <brent.b...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>> How many times do you need to reinstall gems?
>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>> Yes but my time is not and so waiting to reinstall a bunch of gems >>>>>>>> is worth not having gem sets. >>>>>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 12:44 PM, "Richard K Jordan" <rjorda...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I am not a fan of the duplication, but drive space is no longer >>>>>>>>> premium, so it hasn't grated enough to fix yet.
>>>>>>>>> Jeff Barczewski <jeff.barczew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >If you project needs to be able to generate apps in all my rubies >>>>>>>>> (if one >>>>>>>>> >of its purposes is a generator) and be tested in each, then again >>>>>>>>> it means >>>>>>>>> >installing for each and every ruby.
>>>>>>>>> >Also when using bundler it did not have to reinstall the gems >>>>>>>>> locally for >>>>>>>>> >each app, if it could find the appropriate versions in my >>>>>>>>> gempaths, so I >>>>>>>>> >didn't need as much duplication across all my apps, it would just >>>>>>>>> use the >>>>>>>>> >right gem already available..
>>>>>>>>> >Maybe I am the only one who ever had these issues or disliked all >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> >duplication :-)
>>>>>>>>> >On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >> Run the version you want when starting the app. Or create a >>>>>>>>> gemfile first. >>>>>>>>> >> On Apr 9, 2012 12:06 PM, "Jeff Barczewski" < >>>>>>>>> jeff.barczew...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>> For apps, I agree, using bundler is great.
>>>>>>>>> >>> However you do often need some gems installed before you drop >>>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>>> >>> working in an app, for instance you need to run rails to >>>>>>>>> generate an app, >>>>>>>>> >>> so you often need certain things installed before you jump >>>>>>>>> into working in >>>>>>>>> >>> an app.
>>>>>>>>> >>> So it is for these things that you need outside of an app that >>>>>>>>> gemsets >>>>>>>>> >>> are nice (but duplicated in every ruby I would use).
>>>>>>>>> >>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Amos King wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>> Use bundler and not gemsets was my suggestion. >>>>>>>>> >>>> On Apr 9, 2012 12:00 PM, "Jeff Barczewski" < >>>>>>>>> jeff.barczew...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> >>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> I don't know if anyone is interested, but as an experiment, >>>>>>>>> I created a >>>>>>>>> >>>>> replacement for rvm (called brb, which is short for Bundled >>>>>>>>> Rubies or >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Bundled Ruby) that allowed you to install arbitrary rubies, >>>>>>>>> and gemsets >>>>>>>>> >>>>> using bundler and it supported the idea of sharing gems >>>>>>>>> across projects (so >>>>>>>>> >>>>> you woudn't need to have multiple copies even across rubies >>>>>>>>> if they were >>>>>>>>> >>>>> pure ruby). It leveraged having multiple ruby gemset_paths. >>>>>>>>> It worked more >>>>>>>>> >>>>> like bundler in the fact that you would specify things you >>>>>>>>> want (all the >>>>>>>>> >>>>> rubies and gemsets) then run build and it would go out and >>>>>>>>> build everything >>>>>>>>> >>>>> for you.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> I had done this because I didn't like how RVM worked >>>>>>>>> (duplicating so >>>>>>>>> >>>>> many gems) and how complicated the code was (I was trying to >>>>>>>>> find a bug >>>>>>>>> >>>>> buried in nested undocumented shell scripts with no tests).
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> I got it all working but was going to go back and refactor >>>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>>> >>>>> something nicer, but also realized that I was using a >>>>>>>>> feature in bash >>>>>>>>> >>>>> called associated arrays which was added in bash version 4 >>>>>>>>> which has been >>>>>>>>> >>>>> out for a while, but the default Mac OS X was bash 3, so >>>>>>>>> this was not ideal >>>>>>>>> >>>>> (especially considering the number of Mac users using ruby).
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> It was after this that I switched to node.js development and >>>>>>>>> didn't >>>>>>>>> >>>>> work on it much since.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> If anyone is interested I could put it up on github, but I >>>>>>>>> haven't had >>>>>>>>> >>>>> time to refine it and/or figure out what to do with >>>>>>>>> converting from >>>>>>>>> >>>>> associated arrays (if it was to be able to use on Mac OS X >>>>>>>>> without >>>>>>>>> >>>>> upgrading bash).
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> All the best,
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Jeff
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> On Monday, 9 April 2012 11:00:05 UTC-5, Michael Bishop wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Bundler is essential and if you work on multiple projects, >>>>>>>>> there is >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> virtually no way to get around multiple copies of gems on >>>>>>>>> your machine. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Gemsests + RVM help keep conflicts down.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>> Google >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>>> >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>> >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/stlruby/-/Kn_hpg4uzsIJ. >>>>>>>>> >>>>> To post to this group, send email to >>>>>>>>> stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>>> >>>>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>>> >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>>> >>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>> Google >>>>>>>>> >>>> Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>>> >>>> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com >>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>>> >>>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>>> >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>>> >>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>> Jeff Barczewski >>>>>>>>> >>> Inspired Horizons >>>>>>>>> >>> http://inspiredhorizons.com/ >>>>>>>>> >>> Professional Software Craftsmanship
>>>>>>>>> >>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>> Google Groups >>>>>>>>> >>> "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>>> >>> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>>> >>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>>> >>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>>> >> -- >>>>>>>>> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>> Google Groups >>>>>>>>> >> "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>>> >> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>>> >> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>>> >> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>>> >-- >>>>>>>>> >You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>> Google Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>>> >To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >For more options, visit this group at
I personally wouldlike to understand so I can learn. I want to know what color makes the best shed. On Apr 15, 2012 7:56 PM, "Mark Sands" <marksand...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I personally believe that the bike shed looks better blue.
> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> The dependency issues should be handled by bundler and shouldn't matter >> for you.
>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Brent Beer <brent.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Ah, I thought you were arguing against different versions of ruby having >>> different gemsets!
>>> Different projects usually have their own gemset merely out of "just in >>> case" situations because it's so easy to manage and because they dont often >>> change but the versions may differ slightly between projects
>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>> If your using bundle to load your dependencies then why would you have >>>> gemsets. I understand each version of Ruby will have it's own gemset. Why >>>> do you need project level gemsets?
>>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Brent Beer <brent.b...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>> Yes, I also work with ruby full time and have about 5 apps daily that >>>>> I switch between as well, and never run into this problem due to gemsets, >>>>> as is the case for the entire team (~9 people) that I work with.
>>>>> If we didnt have these gemsets we'd be in dependency hell with apps >>>>> ranging from 1.8.7 to 1.9.3 and everywhere in between.
>>>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>> Every time someone on my team updates gems, or if I have to stand up >>>>>> a new development machine, or starting a new project. Frequently enough >>>>>> that a useless feature if I'm using bundler is not worth my time. I write >>>>>> Ruby full time and have many projects that I work on. This is a frequent >>>>>> issue for me.
>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Brent Beer <brent.b...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>> How many times do you need to reinstall gems?
>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>> Yes but my time is not and so waiting to reinstall a bunch of gems >>>>>>>> is worth not having gem sets. >>>>>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 12:44 PM, "Richard K Jordan" <rjorda...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I am not a fan of the duplication, but drive space is no longer >>>>>>>>> premium, so it hasn't grated enough to fix yet.
>>>>>>>>> Jeff Barczewski <jeff.barczew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >If you project needs to be able to generate apps in all my rubies >>>>>>>>> (if one >>>>>>>>> >of its purposes is a generator) and be tested in each, then again >>>>>>>>> it means >>>>>>>>> >installing for each and every ruby.
>>>>>>>>> >Also when using bundler it did not have to reinstall the gems >>>>>>>>> locally for >>>>>>>>> >each app, if it could find the appropriate versions in my >>>>>>>>> gempaths, so I >>>>>>>>> >didn't need as much duplication across all my apps, it would just >>>>>>>>> use the >>>>>>>>> >right gem already available..
>>>>>>>>> >Maybe I am the only one who ever had these issues or disliked all >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> >duplication :-)
>>>>>>>>> >On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >> Run the version you want when starting the app. Or create a >>>>>>>>> gemfile first. >>>>>>>>> >> On Apr 9, 2012 12:06 PM, "Jeff Barczewski" < >>>>>>>>> jeff.barczew...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>> For apps, I agree, using bundler is great.
>>>>>>>>> >>> However you do often need some gems installed before you drop >>>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>>> >>> working in an app, for instance you need to run rails to >>>>>>>>> generate an app, >>>>>>>>> >>> so you often need certain things installed before you jump >>>>>>>>> into working in >>>>>>>>> >>> an app.
>>>>>>>>> >>> So it is for these things that you need outside of an app that >>>>>>>>> gemsets >>>>>>>>> >>> are nice (but duplicated in every ruby I would use).
>>>>>>>>> >>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Amos King wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>> Use bundler and not gemsets was my suggestion. >>>>>>>>> >>>> On Apr 9, 2012 12:00 PM, "Jeff Barczewski" < >>>>>>>>> jeff.barczew...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> >>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> I don't know if anyone is interested, but as an experiment, >>>>>>>>> I created a >>>>>>>>> >>>>> replacement for rvm (called brb, which is short for Bundled >>>>>>>>> Rubies or >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Bundled Ruby) that allowed you to install arbitrary rubies, >>>>>>>>> and gemsets >>>>>>>>> >>>>> using bundler and it supported the idea of sharing gems >>>>>>>>> across projects (so >>>>>>>>> >>>>> you woudn't need to have multiple copies even across rubies >>>>>>>>> if they were >>>>>>>>> >>>>> pure ruby). It leveraged having multiple ruby gemset_paths. >>>>>>>>> It worked more >>>>>>>>> >>>>> like bundler in the fact that you would specify things you >>>>>>>>> want (all the >>>>>>>>> >>>>> rubies and gemsets) then run build and it would go out and >>>>>>>>> build everything >>>>>>>>> >>>>> for you.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> I had done this because I didn't like how RVM worked >>>>>>>>> (duplicating so >>>>>>>>> >>>>> many gems) and how complicated the code was (I was trying to >>>>>>>>> find a bug >>>>>>>>> >>>>> buried in nested undocumented shell scripts with no tests).
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> I got it all working but was going to go back and refactor >>>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>>> >>>>> something nicer, but also realized that I was using a >>>>>>>>> feature in bash >>>>>>>>> >>>>> called associated arrays which was added in bash version 4 >>>>>>>>> which has been >>>>>>>>> >>>>> out for a while, but the default Mac OS X was bash 3, so >>>>>>>>> this was not ideal >>>>>>>>> >>>>> (especially considering the number of Mac users using ruby).
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> It was after this that I switched to node.js development and >>>>>>>>> didn't >>>>>>>>> >>>>> work on it much since.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> If anyone is interested I could put it up on github, but I >>>>>>>>> haven't had >>>>>>>>> >>>>> time to refine it and/or figure out what to do with >>>>>>>>> converting from >>>>>>>>> >>>>> associated arrays (if it was to be able to use on Mac OS X >>>>>>>>> without >>>>>>>>> >>>>> upgrading bash).
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> All the best,
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Jeff
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> On Monday, 9 April 2012 11:00:05 UTC-5, Michael Bishop wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Bundler is essential and if you work on multiple projects, >>>>>>>>> there is >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> virtually no way to get around multiple copies of gems on >>>>>>>>> your machine. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Gemsests + RVM help keep conflicts down.
>>>>>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>> Google >>>>>>>>> >>>>> Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>>> >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>> >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/stlruby/-/Kn_hpg4uzsIJ. >>>>>>>>> >>>>> To post to this group, send email to >>>>>>>>> stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>>> >>>>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>>> >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>>> >>>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>> Google >>>>>>>>> >>>> Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>>> >>>> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com >>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>>> >>>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>>> >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>>> >>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>> Jeff Barczewski >>>>>>>>> >>> Inspired Horizons >>>>>>>>> >>> http://inspiredhorizons.com/ >>>>>>>>> >>> Professional Software Craftsmanship
>>>>>>>>> >>> -- >>>>>>>>> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>> Google Groups >>>>>>>>> >>> "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>>> >>> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>>> >>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>>> >>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>>> >> -- >>>>>>>>> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>> Google Groups >>>>>>>>> >> "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>>> >> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>>> >> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>>> >> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>>> >-- >>>>>>>>> >You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>> Google Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>>> >To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>> >To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com> wrote: >I personally wouldlike to understand so I can learn. I want to know what >color makes the best shed. >On Apr 15, 2012 7:56 PM, "Mark Sands" <marksand...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I personally believe that the bike shed looks better blue.
>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 12:45 PM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The dependency issues should be handled by bundler and shouldn't matter >>> for you.
>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Brent Beer <brent.b...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Ah, I thought you were arguing against different versions of ruby having >>>> different gemsets!
>>>> Different projects usually have their own gemset merely out of "just in >>>> case" situations because it's so easy to manage and because they dont often >>>> change but the versions may differ slightly between projects
>>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>> If your using bundle to load your dependencies then why would you have >>>>> gemsets. I understand each version of Ruby will have it's own gemset. Why >>>>> do you need project level gemsets?
>>>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Brent Beer <brent.b...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>> Yes, I also work with ruby full time and have about 5 apps daily that >>>>>> I switch between as well, and never run into this problem due to gemsets, >>>>>> as is the case for the entire team (~9 people) that I work with.
>>>>>> If we didnt have these gemsets we'd be in dependency hell with apps >>>>>> ranging from 1.8.7 to 1.9.3 and everywhere in between.
>>>>>> On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 11:52 AM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>> Every time someone on my team updates gems, or if I have to stand up >>>>>>> a new development machine, or starting a new project. Frequently enough >>>>>>> that a useless feature if I'm using bundler is not worth my time. I write >>>>>>> Ruby full time and have many projects that I work on. This is a frequent >>>>>>> issue for me.
>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Brent Beer <brent.b...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>> How many times do you need to reinstall gems?
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 11:10 AM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Yes but my time is not and so waiting to reinstall a bunch of gems >>>>>>>>> is worth not having gem sets. >>>>>>>>> On Apr 9, 2012 12:44 PM, "Richard K Jordan" <rjorda...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I am not a fan of the duplication, but drive space is no longer >>>>>>>>>> premium, so it hasn't grated enough to fix yet.
>>>>>>>>>> Jeff Barczewski <jeff.barczew...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >If you project needs to be able to generate apps in all my rubies >>>>>>>>>> (if one >>>>>>>>>> >of its purposes is a generator) and be tested in each, then again >>>>>>>>>> it means >>>>>>>>>> >installing for each and every ruby.
>>>>>>>>>> >Also when using bundler it did not have to reinstall the gems >>>>>>>>>> locally for >>>>>>>>>> >each app, if it could find the appropriate versions in my >>>>>>>>>> gempaths, so I >>>>>>>>>> >didn't need as much duplication across all my apps, it would just >>>>>>>>>> use the >>>>>>>>>> >right gem already available..
>>>>>>>>>> >Maybe I am the only one who ever had these issues or disliked all >>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>> >duplication :-)
>>>>>>>>>> >On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 12:08 PM, Amos King <amos.l.k...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >> Run the version you want when starting the app. Or create a >>>>>>>>>> gemfile first. >>>>>>>>>> >> On Apr 9, 2012 12:06 PM, "Jeff Barczewski" < >>>>>>>>>> jeff.barczew...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >>> For apps, I agree, using bundler is great.
>>>>>>>>>> >>> However you do often need some gems installed before you drop >>>>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>>>> >>> working in an app, for instance you need to run rails to >>>>>>>>>> generate an app, >>>>>>>>>> >>> so you often need certain things installed before you jump >>>>>>>>>> into working in >>>>>>>>>> >>> an app.
>>>>>>>>>> >>> So it is for these things that you need outside of an app that >>>>>>>>>> gemsets >>>>>>>>>> >>> are nice (but duplicated in every ruby I would use).
>>>>>>>>>> >>> On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 12:04 PM, Amos King wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> Use bundler and not gemsets was my suggestion. >>>>>>>>>> >>>> On Apr 9, 2012 12:00 PM, "Jeff Barczewski" < >>>>>>>>>> jeff.barczew...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> I don't know if anyone is interested, but as an experiment, >>>>>>>>>> I created a >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> replacement for rvm (called brb, which is short for Bundled >>>>>>>>>> Rubies or >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Bundled Ruby) that allowed you to install arbitrary rubies, >>>>>>>>>> and gemsets >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> using bundler and it supported the idea of sharing gems >>>>>>>>>> across projects (so >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> you woudn't need to have multiple copies even across rubies >>>>>>>>>> if they were >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> pure ruby). It leveraged having multiple ruby gemset_paths. >>>>>>>>>> It worked more >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> like bundler in the fact that you would specify things you >>>>>>>>>> want (all the >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> rubies and gemsets) then run build and it would go out and >>>>>>>>>> build everything >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> for you.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> I had done this because I didn't like how RVM worked >>>>>>>>>> (duplicating so >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> many gems) and how complicated the code was (I was trying to >>>>>>>>>> find a bug >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> buried in nested undocumented shell scripts with no tests).
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> I got it all working but was going to go back and refactor >>>>>>>>>> into >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> something nicer, but also realized that I was using a >>>>>>>>>> feature in bash >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> called associated arrays which was added in bash version 4 >>>>>>>>>> which has been >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> out for a while, but the default Mac OS X was bash 3, so >>>>>>>>>> this was not ideal >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> (especially considering the number of Mac users using ruby).
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> It was after this that I switched to node.js development and >>>>>>>>>> didn't >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> work on it much since.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> If anyone is interested I could put it up on github, but I >>>>>>>>>> haven't had >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> time to refine it and/or figure out what to do with >>>>>>>>>> converting from >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> associated arrays (if it was to be able to use on Mac OS X >>>>>>>>>> without >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> upgrading bash).
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> All the best,
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Jeff
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> On Monday, 9 April 2012 11:00:05 UTC-5, Michael Bishop wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Bundler is essential and if you work on multiple projects, >>>>>>>>>> there is >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> virtually no way to get around multiple copies of gems on >>>>>>>>>> your machine. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Gemsests + RVM help keep conflicts down.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>> Google >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/stlruby/-/Kn_hpg4uzsIJ. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> To post to this group, send email to >>>>>>>>>> stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>>>> >>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>> Google >>>>>>>>>> >>>> Groups "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>>>> >>>> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com >>>>>>>>>> . >>>>>>>>>> >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>>>> >>>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>>> >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>>>> >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>>>> >>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>> Jeff Barczewski >>>>>>>>>> >>> Inspired Horizons >>>>>>>>>> >>> http://inspiredhorizons.com/ >>>>>>>>>> >>> Professional Software Craftsmanship
>>>>>>>>>> >>> -- >>>>>>>>>> >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>> Google Groups >>>>>>>>>> >>> "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>>>> >>> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>>> >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>>>> >>> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>>> >>> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>>>> >>> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
>>>>>>>>>> >> -- >>>>>>>>>> >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the >>>>>>>>>> Google Groups >>>>>>>>>> >> "Saint Louis Ruby Users Group" group. >>>>>>>>>> >> To post to this group, send email to stlruby@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>>> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>>>>>>>> >> stlruby+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. >>>>>>>>>> >> For more options, visit this group at >>>>>>>>>> >> http://groups.google.com/group/stlruby?hl=en.
