build gem

[Samuel Williams]

Hi

https://rubygems.org/gems/build

I've contacted this guy about a year ago and asked them for the name. They said they were using it for an internal project and were planning to release the code but that was like a year ago and nothing has happened. I'd like to use this name for a cool gem I've been working on and was wondering if it could be released since it looks like it is never going to be used.

Thanks

Samuel

[Amos King]

Samuel

That is between you and the person who reserved the name. 

Amos King

Binary Noggin

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rubygems.org" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rubygems-org...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Samuel Williams]

Right, but at a certain point, you might say that this name is being squatted on. The gem has been EMPTY for at least a couple of years - zero activity. If everyone did that, RubyGems would be a mess. Because there is a shared public namespace, it's a valuable resource which needs to be curated. What's the procedure here to avoid problems like this? That person is clearly sitting on the name with very little motivation to make use of it productively.

[Tyler Knappe]

We've had this discussion fairly regularly. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/rubygems-org/squatters

The response has always been the same.  You need to work with the original owner if you would like the name.  

That being said, the community is open to ideas around how to deal with squatters, but I would suggest first taking a look at the prior discussion *and* the concerns raised with various proposals for preventing and dealing with squatters.

[Amos King]

The rubygems core team is not a paid staff. Handling all the requests of squatters and just trying to verify them would be a full time job for more than one person. Sorry, but you will need to speak to them again and see what you can work out. If you look back through this group you will notice that this has been a topic approached many times. There is no full time talent that can be dedicated to this.

Since the team can not investigate and handle every request they are all left up to the community to work out among themselves.

A quick run of the Thesaurus gave me some good alternatives to "build." How about "erect" or "grow"? Of course there are other types of build. I'm not sure of your particular use of the word.

Good luck!

Amos

Amos King

"The bitterness of poor quality remains

long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten" - Benjamin Franklin

http://dirtyInformation.com
http://github.com/Adkron

http://thisagilelife.com # podcast

=======================================================
I welcome VSRE emails. Learn more at http://vsre.info/
=======================================================

[Samuel Williams]

I will contact the owner, and see what they are doing with the name and report back. I've already contacted them in the past and they said they would release the code, but no updates to any of their code since 2013. They are actually sitting on LOTS of generic names with little or no code/updates.

I often use a thesaurus. I think it's a good idea to choose interesting names. In this case, it's for a build tool so build was the obvious name.

I wouldn't have brought this up if there was a valid useful existing gem with 'build' as the name. In this case, it was established in 2012 and has not changed since, the only file is build/version.rb which includes version 0.0.0. It may be a released gem, but in name only.

[Nick Quaranto]

I've bugged that author on Twitter to see what can be done. Have you contacted that owner of the gem since then? Are there other names that would work well?

On that note: the "Adoption Center" idea still hasn't gotten anywhere. I'd happily advise/comment on a lot of PR's/issues/etc if someone wants to take that on.

[Samuel Williams]

I contacted him last time in March last year. He was a very nice person and he said they were planning to release the gem/code at some point. At what point do you start wondering if that project is dead?

[Evan Phoenix]

He just emailed support and indicated that he wanted the gem perm-deleted so that you could take it. He's yanked all the versions, you should be able to push to it now.

[Scott Bellware]

Samuel,

I think you're taking some liberty with your characterizations of me, my intensions, and my actions, and have ill-represented me considering the cordiality of my communications with you on this subject.

For evidentiary and community transparency reasons, I've published the text of our email conversations regarding the build gem as a public gist: https://gist.github.com/sbellware/b7b1cbc1d851280895e3

The conditions of the build gem and its publication are more or less the same as outlined in our past communications. However, the organization wherein which it was originated is no more.

My motivation to persist with the development of the ecosystem of libraries of which the build gem is a member is not what it was when we last spoke, and my attention is squarely elsewhere.

I've yanked the gem from rubygems.org, and requested that the gem be removed completely so that the name can be recycled. See: http://help.rubygems.org/discussions/problems/20485-complete-removal-of-the-gem-named-build.

Regarding the "LOTS" of generic names that we are "sitting on" with "little or no code/updates", please provide me some indication of compacts that we may have broken in regards to expected nature or structure of libraries, as well as continued changes to completed work. If there's some violation, we can make it a part of a transparent dialog in open forum, and come to an understanding as to what constitutes criteria for enduring work.

Best,

Scott