Closed stevenharman closed 7 months ago
@stevenharman I sent you an invite to be a collaborator. Game on and thumbs up for the IO implementation.
Great. I was going to spend a little time getting the lib up-to-date with current expectations for a Gem - things like having a Gemfile
that loads the gemspec, declaring dev dependencies, file locations, etc… Then maybe stardardrb
the whole thing? And maybe, maybe get it running the tests via a GitHub Action.
How does that sound?
I just realized that there's no license defined in the .gemspec
. Do you have a preferred license you'd want this under? I usually go with MIT, but I'd not presume that's your preference?
UPDATE: I just noticed that document.rb
has the MIT license text in it. So I'm guessing your intent was to use the MIT license then? I'll go ahead and add that metadata to the .gemspec
and add a LICENSE
file (which GitHub and other tooling uses to automate license auditing/verification).
Yes, MIT its the original license.
Hello! Thank you for RGhost. I love finding Gems that have been around as long as I have (in the Ruby community, I mean 😄). I too remember the great SVN to Git (and GitHub) migration.
I was wondering if you were open to new contributions? For example, I'd like to be able to render an PDF to an
IO
object, without having to write to aFile
.And, in a more general sense, would you be OK with applying a consistent formatting to the project? I'm a fan if Standard.rb, mostly b/c we can delegate formatting and such to folks I trust to makes sensible, and minimal rules, while also getting consistency, thus reducing brain power needed to see/understand what the code is doing.
Anyhow, I'd like to contribute, but want to first understand what you're game to accept.