RubyForge gem index is no more

[Tom Copeland]

Hello -

A few days ago we repointed gems.rubyforge.org to the gemcutter.org box. =
This means that Nick Quaranto's excellent gemcutter app is now indexing =
and serving all the gems - so rather than having two gem indexes, we now =
have one. As a consequence of this, when you release files to =
RubyForge, you will probably also want to do a "gem push" to get them up =
into gemcutter and into the main gem index.

Sorry we didn't post this here at the time. There was a certain amount =
of tweeting and whatnot but this is the place where these things should =
be announced.

Yours,

Tom=

 

[Gregory Brown]

Hello -

A few days ago we repointed gems.rubyforge.org to the gemcutter.org box. =

=A0This means that Nick Quaranto's excellent gemcutter app is now indexing =
and serving all the gems - so rather than having two gem indexes, we now ha=
ve one. =A0As a consequence of this, when you release files to RubyForge, y=
ou will probably also want to do a "gem push" to get them up into gemcutter=
and into the main gem index.

Sorry we didn't post this here at the time. =A0There was a certain amount=

of tweeting and whatnot but this is the place where these things should be=
announced.

Tom, does RubyForge have a mechanism for bulk emailing all accounts?
I think there are a lot of Ruby hackers who don't read RubyTalk
anymore these days.
Honestly, even if there was an announcement here, I might have missed
it, I'm just lucky to have vigilant users on Prawn who noticed our gem
hadn't updated

-greg

 

[Tom Copeland]

box. This means that Nick Quaranto's excellent gemcutter app is now =
indexing and serving all the gems - so rather than having two gem =
indexes, we now have one. As a consequence of this, when you release =
files to RubyForge, you will probably also want to do a "gem push" to =
get them up into gemcutter and into the main gem index.amount of tweeting and whatnot but this is the place where these things =
should be announced.

=20
Tom, does RubyForge have a mechanism for bulk emailing all accounts?
I think there are a lot of Ruby hackers who don't read RubyTalk
anymore these days.
Honestly, even if there was an announcement here, I might have missed
it, I'm just lucky to have vigilant users on Prawn who noticed our gem
hadn't updated

Hi Greg -

Yup, there's a bulk email gizmo that can create a message and then a =
cron thingy to email everyone. Hm... looks like it has an option for =
only sending to project admins, which would limit the volume. I vaguely =
recall that it sends an email to the admin of each project, though - so =
if you have 10 projects you get 10 emails. Hm, let me see if I can do =
something with that....

Thanks,

Tom

 

[Ryan Davis]

Yup, there's a bulk email gizmo that can create a message and then a =

cron thingy to email everyone. Hm... looks like it has an option for =
only sending to project admins, which would limit the volume. I vaguely =
recall that it sends an email to the admin of each project, though - so =
if you have 10 projects you get 10 emails. Hm, let me see if I can do =
something with that....

I'm fine getting 10-20 emails on this if it is a 1-time thing. Esp for =
something this big/important.

 

[Gregory Brown]

n thingy to email everyone. =A0Hm... looks like it has an option for only s=
ending to project admins, which would limit the volume. =A0I vaguely recall=
that it sends an email to the admin of each project, though - so if you ha=
ve 10 projects you get 10 emails. =A0Hm, let me see if I can do something w=
ith that....

I'm fine getting 10-20 emails on this if it is a 1-time thing. Esp for so=

mething this big/important.

Yeah, in fact, that might be a 'feature' here.

-greg

 

[Tom Copeland]

cron thingy to email everyone. Hm... looks like it has an option for =
only sending to project admins, which would limit the volume. I vaguely =
recall that it sends an email to the admin of each project, though - so =
if you have 10 projects you get 10 emails. Hm, let me see if I can do =
something with that....for something this big/important.

=20
Yeah, in fact, that might be a 'feature' here.

Hm, good point. OK, I'll do one to all project admins... Postfix, =
prepare yourself...

Thanks,

Tom

 

[Tom Copeland]

=20
On Nov 19, 2009, at 11:23 PM, Gregory Brown wrote:
=20

a cron thingy to email everyone. Hm... looks like it has an option for =
only sending to project admins, which would limit the volume. I vaguely =
recall that it sends an email to the admin of each project, though - so =
if you have 10 projects you get 10 emails. Hm, let me see if I can do =
something with that....

=20
Hm, good point. OK, I'll do one to all project admins... Postfix, =

prepare yourself...

And, sent.

It's funny, the mass mailer sends emails ordered by user_id ascending. =
So I'm seeing emails go out to all the folks who signed up for accounts =
back in 2003... Paul Brannan, Curt Hibbs... anyhow, good times.

Yours,

Tom

 

[James Britt]

Honestly, even if there was an announcement here, I might have missed
it, I'm just lucky to have vigilant users on Prawn who noticed our gem
hadn't updated

I don't think there was much of any discussion or announcement on
ruby-talk about moving gems off rubyforge and having gemcutter take over.


--
James Britt

www.jamesbritt.com - Playing with Better Toys
www.ruby-doc.org - Ruby Help & Documentation
www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
www.neurogami.com - Smart application development

 

[Luis Lavena]

I don't think there was much of any discussion or announcement on
ruby-talk about moving gems off rubyforge and having gemcutter take over.

No, there wasn't, as all the communications about the move, the
decision and everything happened in the background.

Just to summarize:

August 26, 2009:
Nick Quaranto posted his proposal to replace the canonical gem serving
with Gemcutter.

http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/rubygems-developers/2009-August/004914.html

October 26, 2009:
Nick Quaranto announced that conversation with Ruby Central about
shutting down certain services of RubyForge having Gemcutter taking
over some of them:

http://update.gemcutter.org/2009/10/26/transition.html

Then, November 16, this post:
http://update.gemcutter.org/2009/11/16/moving-forward.html

And that's all.

Of course, there was lot of twitter noise about it, lot of disruption
about gem service that mistakenly got reported to RubyInstaller and
RubyGems projects.

A trend or practice that is getting used in Ruby-land:

http://blog.mmediasys.com/2008/12/29/guas-giving-unwanted-advice-series-2/

 

[Tom Copeland]

=20
I don't think there was much of any discussion or announcement on =

ruby-talk about moving gems off rubyforge and having gemcutter take =
over.

I think the hope was that for most people nothing would change, since =
gems.rubyforge.org was repointed to the new box. So "gem install rails" =
keeps on working. Also, Ruby Central is running the gemcutter app =
instance that's serving everything, so that's the same also. Many gem =
publishers are affected by the move... although many had already moved =
over to gemcutter (or first to github and then to gemcutter). Hopefully =
everyone else will see the recent ruby-talk traffic and the mass email =
to all RubyForge admins. =20

I guess the idea was that this was more of a service improvement that =
most Ruby users wouldn't notice, except for the improvements. Instead =
of a static gem index with a 5 minute delay and no user interface, =
there's now an excellent site that can actually be searched effectively.

But I agree - more comms on ruby-talk would have been good.

Yours,

Tom

 

[Tom Copeland]

No, there wasn't, as all the communications about the move, the
decision and everything happened in the background.

Yup, please see my other post about some of the thoughts behind that.

Yours,

Tom

 

[Luis Lavena]

Yup, please see my other post about some of the thoughts behind that.

Tom, I'm not arguing why the communication was in the background or
not, I'm cool with Gemcutter and really like it.

The issue, from my PoV is other.

I've closed several bug reports and responded several emails about 500
errors and 403 errors when installing gems.

Is not that these users didn't connect properly to the new server, but
they had an older version of RubyGems as part of the combo with other
issues that I couldn't replicate

A better heads up, not just for Ruby gem authors for community as a
whole using channels like RubyForge, Ruby-Lang and Ruby-Talk would
have been great.

Anyhow, canned a template answer with links to either my own posts and
Gemcutter ones for the time being.

Thank you for your time answering my comments.

 

[Tom Copeland]

=20
Tom, I'm not arguing why the communication was in the background or
not, I'm cool with Gemcutter and really like it.
=20
The issue, from my PoV is other.
=20
I've closed several bug reports and responded several emails about 500
errors and 403 errors when installing gems.
=20
Is not that these users didn't connect properly to the new server, but
they had an older version of RubyGems as part of the combo with other
issues that I couldn't replicate
=20
A better heads up, not just for Ruby gem authors for community as a
whole using channels like RubyForge, Ruby-Lang and Ruby-Talk would
have been great.
=20
Anyhow, canned a template answer with links to either my own posts and
Gemcutter ones for the time being.
=20
Thank you for your time answering my comments.

Luis, you're absolutely right, that's a hole in the new system - it =
doesn't generate yaml.Z and yaml, so old rubygem clients can't work with =
it. And of course you're on the receiving end of complaints about =
that... you're right, that is a bummer. I wonder if there's something =
we can do about that... maybe pull the gems off S3 and generate those =
old indexes once a week or something.

As you said, comms could have been better throughout this process. =
Something for us to improve in the future,

Yours,

Tom

 

[Tom Copeland]

=20

=20
Luis, you're absolutely right, that's a hole in the new system - it =

doesn't generate yaml.Z and yaml, so old rubygem clients can't work with =
it. And of course you're on the receiving end of complaints about =
that... you're right, that is a bummer. I wonder if there's something =
we can do about that... maybe pull the gems off S3 and generate those =
old indexes once a week or something.

Nick Quaranto has done some work on gemcutter to support these older =
indexes at least for "gem update --system":

http://gemcutter.org/yaml

So older rubygem installations can be upgraded via the usual method, =
good stuff,

Yours,

Tom=