Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Yes, this is clearly what the Debian people think. But you aren't engaging with the argument, you're just hissing at it.

Again: I didn't just say "Ruby's real users are people who think like I do". I said "Ruby is used by significantly more developers than by end-users and should be optimized for its most important use case". You can disagree with that, but the onus is on your to support your argument with evidence.

Instead, you've attempted to personalize the argument. Try again.



This. From what I've seen of the entire Debian-Ruby fiasco, your post accurately describes how Debian people talk past all the people who are complaining about Ruby on Debian.

Optimize for the largest audience!


Ruby targets developers. I think that's wrong, but let's say you're right. It still doesn't matter. Debian targets end users. If you want a distribution that doesn't target end users, use a different distribution, like Gentoo.

But Debian is one of the best distributions because of the way it targets end users and because it never compromises.

You can't eat your cake and have it too.


The thing you're missing here is the privileged place "/usr/bin" has on the filesystem. It is reasonable and proper for a package to expect to install a real, unadulterated version of itself in the standard user path. You can't simply say "well, developers can just install their own version" while at the same time installing a broken version of Ruby in the standard path.

The right call would have been not to package Ruby at all.


I think it may even be true that distribution maintainers should look at installing the scripting languages their OS requires in different privileged places and version-locking their system scripts, as upgrading Python from 2.4 to 2.7 can break some system scripts, yet useful tools like Mercurial don't like very old versions of Python.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: