search

SandersForPresident / BusRSVP

Reserve a seat on a bus to go to a Bernie Sanders event
Other
7 stars 4 forks source link

Ignore vendor/bundle so I can install gems locally. #10

Closed eric-johnson closed 9 years ago

eric-johnson commented 9 years ago

Unless we actually want to check in gems.

maclover7 commented 9 years ago

Why do we need to ignore vendor/bundle - what are you putting in there? When you run bundle install, I don't think vendor/bundle is used at all.

eric-johnson commented 9 years ago

Not a big deal, I just prefer to install gems local to the project to keep things separated. bundle install --path vendor/bundle

atticoos commented 9 years ago

Should update the docs if we're designating vendor/bundle as the local installation path

eric-johnson commented 9 years ago

That's fine, but I don't think designating a directory to install your gems is necessary. You can install your gems pretty much anywhere on your computer, as long as your .bundle/config knows where to look.

atticoos commented 9 years ago

Well i mean, we're adding it to the gitignore, so we ought to describe that, no?

atticoos commented 9 years ago

Just seems like if people have a preference to local installs that we should standardize that to the directory you've chosen here

eric-johnson commented 9 years ago

For people that choose to install their gems local to the project they're working on, vendor/bundle is the conventional place for them to install those gems.

atticoos commented 9 years ago

Oh, already standardized, great!

atticoos commented 9 years ago

(not a rubyist here, apologies)

maclover7 commented 9 years ago

The default for Ruby projects (for the 99% of devs I have worked with) is to just run bundle install, not to install to vendor/bundle. If you choose to download your gems there, it's cool with me. I'd like it if the project followed Ruby community "standards". Sorry if this is coming off as harsh at all.