Request for help: remove bundler from ruby 2.6 port

[Pete Wright]

On 12/29/18 2:34 PM, Adam Weinberger wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 6:20 AM Yasuhiro KIMURA <yasu at utahime.org> wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> Ruby 2.6.0 is released and I tried porting it.
>>
>> After creating start point by 'svn copy lang/ruby25 lang/ruby26', I
>> made following changes.
>>
>> https://www.utahime.org/FreeBSD/ports/lang_ruby26.patch
>>
>> It is build successfully and works fine on 12.0-RELEASE amd64. But
>> there is still one issue left.
>>
>>  From 2.6.0 ruby includes 'bundler'. But according to the convention of
>> ruby port it should be removed from ruby core port in the same way as
>> 'gem' and 'rake'. I learned from Makefile that it is achieved by
>> removing related files from source tree at post-patch target. However
>> I don't know enough about what files need to be removed to cleanly
>> remove bundler from ruby 2.6 port.
>>
>> So would someone please help me about it?
> I think perhaps it's worth considering doing the opposite and,
> beginning with 2.6, install the entire standard library by default.
> Gems and stdlib exist side-by-side without problem, and many of the
> gems that are deleted are generally kept up-to-date.
>
> Even if we don't want to install the entire standard library, I'd at
> least strongly argue for including the most important gems (rake, gem,
> minitest, and bundler) by default. They are basic components of ruby
> itself, and ports should provide //optional// newer versions of them.
+1 from me on this.

i think the benefits of lowering the porting overhead combined with the 
fact that most ruby envs i've supported (and currently support) are 
built around the expectation that rake, gem and bundler are all 
available - so this would lower my administrative overhead as well.

i will hopefully have time to give your patch a test on my end this 
weekend and send some feedback.

cheers,
-pete

-- 
Pete Wright
pete at nomadlogic.org
@nomadlogicLA