[katello-devel] Bundler vs rpm-gems

[Petr Chalupa]

We should not drop our gem-repo, we would not be able to provide gem 
with patches from rpms to non fedora/rhel systems (I and any other non 
fedora developer need those to be able to reasonable fix bugs).

Petr

On 22.08.12 14:12, Bryan Kearney wrote:
> On 08/22/2012 04:54 AM, Dmitri Dolguikh wrote:
>> On 22/08/12 09:39 AM, Petr Chalupa wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> as Ivan and Lukas said on mail-list, I had some ideas how to solve our
>>> bundler/rpm issues. Then I had discussion with Ivan and Mirek and here
>>> is the proposed solution.
>>>
>>> == Requirements
>>>
>>> When installing on fedora/rhel in production. Do not mess with the
>>> production setup, rpm gems are used, 'bundle install' wont install
>>> anything else.
>>>
>>> When installing on fedora/rhel in development. 'bundle install'
>>> prefers rpm-gems even if there is a newer gem in our gem-repo [2].
>>> Additional development dependencies are installed.
>>>
>>> When installing on any other system (Debian, Ubuntu, Mac, ...) in
>>> development. 'bundle install' installs the same versions of gems as
>>> would be installed on fedora. Optionally (at least made it possible in
>>> the future) 'bundle install' installs not only the same versions but
>>> also gems including security fixes included in rpm-gems.
>>>
>>> == Proposal
>>>
>>> I'll add monkey patch to katello/master for bundler which will ensure
>>> that rpm-gems are preferred (even if they are older than gems in a
>>> gem-repo). It's based on bkabrda's patch [1].
>>>
>>> I'll ensure that our gem repo [2] contains all gems needed for katello
>>> development (some are still missing). This enables katello (rails app)
>>> to be installed on any system without rubygems.org.
>>>
>>> I would like to work on this in the next iteration. Also I would like
>>> to explore how difficult would be to create gem versions with security
>>> patches (which is important for non fedora development - me).
>>>
>>> We also discussed it would be nice to move our gem-repo to github a
>>> publish it on pages.github. The repo would be more visible. It would
>>> allow us to use pull-requests for tracking new gem-dependencies. It
>>> would be on one place.
>> I'm going to suggest that we stop maintaining katello-specific gem
>> repository, and for a few reasons:
>>   - it's redundant
>>   - we should make more effort to work with upstream, esp. if this
>> concerns security issues
>>   - current katello gem repository is not sufficient to be used with
>> bundler, as it lacks some of the gems
>>
>
> I agree... except that we will want to ensure that we stay on a specific
> version of the gems so we are not always repackaging.
>
> - bk
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> katello-devel mailing list
> katello-devel at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/katello-devel