Thus, Zed offering a polite "bug report" rather than bitch and moan about it probably wouldn't have been all that much more effective -- seeing as how it has remained in the current non-functioning state for many years.
And trying to round up a lynch mob is more effective how?
Compared to the previous total lack of a discussion over the last several years, it seems Zed's approach has been quite efficient.
Also, if you read the Debian guy's opinion, it is clear that, behind the scenes, and away from all the kerfluffle, people are doing work to improve the situation.
Also, you people seem awfully sure of yourself. If you peruse the bug reports, you might find some interesting nuggets:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=588125
> - Do we want to disable gem update --system? I think that we should allow a way for the user to do it anyway.
But don't let me disabuse you of your preconceived notions.
There's already a working solution provided by Apple for Mac OS X and improved upon by the RubyGems team. There's concepts of vendor gems, system gems, user gems, and I think one other level. The Debian team has never considered it despite being told that it's there. The Debian team has also never offered patches that would help RubyGems come more in line with what Debian thinks it should be doing.
Why should the RubyGems guys bother working with uncooperative Debian maintainers?
Of course, the more general point stands that the current state of the Debian/rubygems integration is far from ideal. However, fixing it takes people thinking about the problem and working on it, not just moaning and calling for boycotts. What a pissy attitude: it's easy to say "this sucks!", but much harder to create something better, or fix the broken thing.
I would have been quite comprehending of a "I'm very frustrated by X, Y, and Z about Debian". I mean, it certainly has its flaws (I ended up moving to Ubuntu myself). Another thing is this entitled attitude of "let's hurt them!"