Publish to Rubygems
robink opened this issue · comments
It's a bad practice to use directly source code coming from github in a production app.
Source code should be packaged into a gem and published to Rubygems.
We can't do this, since there is another gem using the same gem name and the same class names as this project. I guess we could publish it as songkick-oauth2-provider, but this goes against standard gem naming advice and the class name clash would still concern me.
oauth2-caterer?
oauth2-dispenser?
oauth2-purveyor?
oauth2-provisioner?
Yes, why not having an original name?
Because you're supposed to name gems after their root/main namespace. It's not a rule as such but it's certainly helpful to users.
Initially I didn't want to publish to Rubygems as I was wary of saying, 'hey this is the OAuth2::Provider gem, we're definitely going to update it along with draft releases'. But now a few people have asked us to release it and it's still (as far as I know) more complete and portable than anything else out there.
If we do publish it, the name will probably be songkick-oauth2-provider. In the mean time, building a gem rather than relying on master from GitHub is easy. Clone, pick a commit you're happy with, and gem build oauth2-provider.gemspec. You can convert the .gem to a .deb using fpm if that makes distributing to your servers easier.