Forum: Rails deployment BSD: Use gems or ports?

Announcement (2017-05-07): is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see and for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
1b6ed15a6126e1d5ef4d7d15550f30bb?d=identicon&s=25 François Montel (zerohalo)
on 2007-04-12 19:59
I'm deploying Rails on a new BSD 6.2 server. I've always used gems to
install and update Rails and other Ruby libraries on other systems. My
IT dept wants us to use ports across the board as much as possible. Yet
most talk of Rails deployment on mailing lists, etc., is all about gems.
Is gems "the" way to deploy/maintain Rails (and libraries needed by
Rails apps), or does ports work just as well? Are there advantages using
gems instead of ports? Or does either work? Not ever gem has a port, so
do you install Rails from ports, and other libraries from gems - mix and
match? Any advice? Thank you.
1b6ed15a6126e1d5ef4d7d15550f30bb?d=identicon&s=25 François Montel (zerohalo)
on 2007-04-12 20:18
PS. I should have specified: This is FreeBSD. And Ruby is installed from
34f26dde337f0a0d2d380e11117e82f6?d=identicon&s=25 Vishnu Gopal (Guest)
on 2007-04-12 20:44
(Received via mailing list)
Ports do not work as well. Gems are updated far more often. However,
if you don't always want to be bleeding edge, and can live with an
"old" version for some time, it'd be okay I guess. Afaik, rails is
available as a port.

And having said that, a search for "rubygem" yields a lot of results,
and many of them seem to be current:

This topic is locked and can not be replied to.