Live data from Hacker News

Gem.coop

gem.coop

71–80 of 331 posts

Re: Gem.coop

#71

So, ignoring everything that got us here, what do people think about this? As I see it, there is the original rubygems, which has lost all of it's maintainers, and this new one, that has most of the original active maintainers? (how many were there before? it has most of the ones I think about, but I didn't know who was active over there. I mostly saw activity from deivid and didn't know about most of the others to b…

re: funding model, looks like it's TBD[0]

[0] https://bsky.app/profile/indirect.io/post/3m2j2pcinz22j

Re: Gem.coop

#72

So, ignoring everything that got us here, what do people think about this? As I see it, there is the original rubygems, which has lost all of it's maintainers, and this new one, that has most of the original active maintainers? (how many were there before? it has most of the ones I think about, but I didn't know who was active over there. I mostly saw activity from deivid and didn't know about most of the others to b…

I don't plan on switching to a rubygems fork that does not offer technical/security benefits over the original.

They can win me over with a gem distribution site that requires code signing out of the box and a bundler that enforces it out of the box.

Re: Gem.coop

#73

So, ignoring everything that got us here, what do people think about this? As I see it, there is the original rubygems, which has lost all of it's maintainers, and this new one, that has most of the original active maintainers? (how many were there before? it has most of the ones I think about, but I didn't know who was active over there. I mostly saw activity from deivid and didn't know about most of the others to b…

I don't plan on switching to a rubygems fork that does not offer technical/security benefits over the original. They can win me over with a gem distribution site that requires code signing out of the box and a bundler that enforces it out of the box.

For me, having the software be maintained (and have a security engineer working on it) feels like a security benefit.

Does the original have many maintainers left?

Re: Gem.coop

#74

So, ignoring everything that got us here, what do people think about this? As I see it, there is the original rubygems, which has lost all of it's maintainers, and this new one, that has most of the original active maintainers? (how many were there before? it has most of the ones I think about, but I didn't know who was active over there. I mostly saw activity from deivid and didn't know about most of the others to b…

I personally cannot think of a new ruby gems or bundler feature from the past decade that I noticed or cared about. That isn't to say that there aren't any; I just don't know what they are.

Re: Gem.coop

#75

I hope they tackle the actual main issue with Rubygems -- lack of any sort of code signing... (I know the functionality exists, but it's not required to publish in Rubygems, and off by default on gem install. In other words it's as if it doesn't exist) The fash problem in the Rails ecosystem is next on the list, and I hope there is community consensus to fork this as well.

What does “fash problem” mean?

[deleted]

Re: Gem.coop

#76

So, ignoring everything that got us here, what do people think about this? As I see it, there is the original rubygems, which has lost all of it's maintainers, and this new one, that has most of the original active maintainers? (how many were there before? it has most of the ones I think about, but I didn't know who was active over there. I mostly saw activity from deivid and didn't know about most of the others to b…

I personally cannot think of a new ruby gems or bundler feature from the past decade that I noticed or cared about. That isn't to say that there aren't any; I just don't know what they are.

Lockfile checksums are quite new and useful.

Re: Gem.coop

#77

I'm really pleased to see this happening, but sad that it has come to this. What I'd really like to see is a whole bunch of people acting more professionally. Who you pray to, who you vote for, and who you sleep with are irrelevant to a professional context - and open source development is a professional context. So everyone needs to keep their professional and personal lives separate. I know that at best I would be…

If who you vote for will put me into a torture camp (or otherwise devalues my life or personhood), then I can't work with you, so no it is not irrelevant. (neither the "me" nor the "you" here refer to you or me personally ofc.)

Please stop with this type of ridiculous hyperbole.

Re: Gem.coop

#78

So, ignoring everything that got us here, what do people think about this? As I see it, there is the original rubygems, which has lost all of it's maintainers, and this new one, that has most of the original active maintainers? (how many were there before? it has most of the ones I think about, but I didn't know who was active over there. I mostly saw activity from deivid and didn't know about most of the others to b…

I personally cannot think of a new ruby gems or bundler feature from the past decade that I noticed or cared about. That isn't to say that there aren't any; I just don't know what they are.

I think I basically agree with this, but my thoughts are more on which org is better placed now to respond to things like the recent supply chain attacks (ref for the specific recent ruby one[0][1]).

I'm unsure on who is better placed to handle that stuff now. My view is that the people that were doing that are now with gem.coop, but rubygems still has the infra (i.e. you'd email security@rubygems.org still for now).

I'm unsure about what to think about longer term (my personal approach is currently "wait and see").

Similarly, I'm perfectly happy with bundler for now, but if `rv` turns out to be like `uv`, I'd happily switch (drop-in replacement, but faster/some better features).

[0] https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/60-malicious-...

[1] https://blog.rubygems.org/2025/08/08/malicious-gems-removal....

Re: Gem.coop

#79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If who you vote for will put me into a torture camp (or otherwise devalues my life or personhood), then I can't work with you, so no it is not irrelevant. (neither the "me" nor the "you" here refer to you or me personally ofc.)

Please stop with this type of ridiculous hyperbole.

People would be less inclined to say ridiculous things like this if they didn't keep happening.

Re: Gem.coop

#80

So, ignoring everything that got us here, what do people think about this? As I see it, there is the original rubygems, which has lost all of it's maintainers, and this new one, that has most of the original active maintainers? (how many were there before? it has most of the ones I think about, but I didn't know who was active over there. I mostly saw activity from deivid and didn't know about most of the others to b…

I personally cannot think of a new ruby gems or bundler feature from the past decade that I noticed or cared about. That isn't to say that there aren't any; I just don't know what they are.

There have been several releases with incremental but still notable performance improvements. The overall cadence has been pretty steady, intentionally targeting roughly one minor release per year since 2019-ish, with handfuls of quality of life improvements in each. Arguably RubyGems and Bundler are infrastructure, so the major feature is stability. What sort of big feature are you imagining is missing from your dependency management system?
Post reply on HN