From owner-freebsd-ruby@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Nov 18 23:15:43 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ruby@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB581F85
 for <freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org>; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 23:15:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-wi0-x230.google.com (mail-wi0-x230.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::230])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7F6751CB
 for <freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org>; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 23:15:43 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-wi0-f176.google.com with SMTP id ex7so3544526wid.15
 for <freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org>; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:15:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
 bh=YNF34iMCWdOEr401yFlIRhbHrrC/6XOaaGgE0CHxuXA=;
 b=DrMHZLdtGXeuIapD7EzBkfFJGRfnFhx7RjYwXXrnCVGolJJnBsTScqKk91JLxcP7BM
 /IPwRfTAyKDuqE7fu8ZQMtRqKUk/WcgxL8YXkgidzkg2BliVPd8H7R+/ivt6hM5KzcrC
 1h6U0HVb0AS9W0kMParV/jVVV6c0iJfJY1stHzvM9o1pSYvdqKBcHsx+M4v9BeuoB5uv
 GOKVuNea54nuFKmfKQud2Q28bS4HgMGjo9mWmcJ8MIAy4OISa2kZHRzTeSwfFQwobPCO
 CrQL0+pE5o1BSZ/t55NLfrnMvj+JWv3fLn7cj2tcyatRqJAjeskWpYw1FrelQTQncWBl
 RjJA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.119.193 with SMTP id kw1mr51747729wjb.37.1416352541900; 
 Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:15:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.194.14.162 with HTTP; Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:15:41 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 15:15:41 -0800
Message-ID: <CAPz+YdDAkUJW1-Zw+-=wmeT4w8WxhonXx6Uo=r69hgf+z41kGg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: What determines whether a rubygem should be ported or not?
From: Matthew Closson <matthew.closson@gmail.com>
To: freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18-1
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: FreeBSD-specific Ruby discussions <freebsd-ruby.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-ruby>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ruby-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ruby/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ruby@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ruby-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ruby>,
 <mailto:freebsd-ruby-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 23:15:44 -0000

Greetings!  What determines whether a specific ruby gem should have a
FreeBSD port created for it or not.

I've looked at the list of available packages / ports that start with
rubygem-* and its not obvious to me if its because the gem really required
some platform specific patching to build and install correctly on FreeBSD
or if is another reason or if its just arbitrary that someone decided to
create a port for a specific gem at one point in time.

Thanks for any information on this.

                 -Matthew-