On 5/4/06, Ross D. [email protected] wrote:
One scanario where you might want to separate would be a productions
server running Ruby apps. Would you want or need irb, ri and rdoc on
a server where you’re not doing development? (that’s not a retorical
question I’m new to Ruby and Rails)
That’s why I made the statement that I did:
And the problem is that irb1.8, ri1.8, and rdoc1.8 have no
business being separate. (At least the program files.)
The data files, I won't argue with.
Ok. ri and rdoc aren’t just commands. There are classes behind both.
Rdoc is a full-on document generator and templating system with an
interface to graphviz. (Limited purpose on that interface, but it’s
present nonetheless.) Ri is generated by rdoc, but the ri system is
also a YAML data lookup.
These things – and bits and pieces of irb – could be used by the
enterprising developer interested in reuse.
So … no.
There’s no good excuse for carving up the bits of the Ruby Standard
Library that aren’t bringing in X (e.g., Ruby’s Tk support).
I do not believe that zlib and OpenSSL are optional components of Ruby,
either. (zlib is required to make RubyGems run; there is an optional
security feature built into RubyGems that can be done with … OpenSSL.)