
Git Hub Serves More Ruby Gems Than Rubyforge - jasonlbaptiste
http://gist.github.com/119751
======
csbartus
RubyForge is ... web 1.0.

GitHub soon will be the new operating system for coders: repository, product
wiki, tech blog, issue tracker, collaboration, messaging

------
mhartl
Every time I go to RubyForge to make a gem, I always get stuck on the first
page, where they make you name the project, fill out the project purpose and
summary, and so on. Then I realize I'm not ready to make it a gem yet, and
push the repo up to GitHub.

Thanks, guys, for making sharing code so easy!

------
jrockway
When will Github do the same thing for CPAN modules? I would love to not have
to release modules, and instead just tag my project as stable and let the
toolchain do its thing.

An API for this would also be acceptable; then I can implement this for them.

~~~
defunkt
We were talking tonight about CPAN modules, Python eggs, and PEAR... pears?

We'd love to take what we've learned serving Rubygems and apply the knowledge
to any other languages that have a solid packaging system.

~~~
ubernostrum
Python may be a bit more difficult than you'd expect. The tools --
easy_install, pip, etc. -- are built around a core which, though it _can_ use
alternate sources to look for packages, happens to have things like heuristics
for screen-scraping pypi.python.org hard-coded in.

~~~
simonw
Does anyone else find the idea of a package installer that /screen scrapes a
website for download links/ deeply and fundamentally disturbing, or is it just
me?

~~~
jrockway
It's obviously impossible to write bad code in Python, so clearly _everyone
else_ is wrong. Guido said so, and he works for Google!

------
ben
This is something to be proud of, and github is great work.

It's not really accurate, though because this lists every user's fork of a gem
as a distinct gem. Here's a script I put together to get a different count,
which I believe is more of a "real" count.

<http://gist.github.com/120207>

It's 3140 as I write this, not 4766.

~~~
pjhyett
Forks aren't gem-enabled by default. Meaning, the forker had to go out of
their way to indicate there is something different about their gem. Is it
possible there isn't unique code on some of these gems? Sure, but I wouldn't
discount them outright.

------
nexneo
Github server gem as authorname-projectname so duplicate of same project
should be removed from this counting. That will give actual number

~~~
tlrobinson
3131 fyi. Here's the top 10:

    
    
      18 webrat
      18 will_paginate
      20 god
      29 rack
      30 sinatra
      31 twitter
      33 integrity
      37 merb
      48 dm
      71 ruby
    
    
        gem list -r -s http://gems.github.com | cut -d- -f 2 | cut -d " " -f 1 | sort | uniq -c | sort -n | tail -10

------
Oompa
Fantastic. I love Github so much more than RubyForge when dealing with gem
creation. Now all it needs is to become a default source for rubygems.

------
Tichy
What are the download stats?

