Remove webrick from stdlib
I propose to move webrick to bundled gems or remove it from stdlib of ruby.
We have several vulnerability issues in webrick gem.
The ruby core team don't have enough time to handle them. We should remove webrick from default gems at least.
Patch for this feature: https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/3729
Updated by jeremyevans0 (Jeremy Evans) about 2 years ago
I am in favor of this change. I prefer removing webrick from stdlib, as otherwise we are still likely to be shipping vulnerable code if there is a security issue in webrick. Moving webrick from default gems to bundled gems doesn't change much security wise, other than making it slightly more difficult to use an separately installed webrick gem.
Updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze) about 2 years ago
Doesn't RubyGems depend on WEBrick (notably for
It seems also RDoc depends on it.
And I know
ruby -run -e httpd . -p8080 depends on it as well.
I think having a basic HTTP server in stdlib is important (bundled gem is fine for that).
Notably for properly testing Socket and new IO APIs.
Also removing it entirely without any kind of deprecation first seems like it might break lots of things.
Updated by normalperson (Eric Wong) almost 2 years ago
@normalperson (Eric Wong) What do you think?
I don't really care about Ruby, at the moment...
But if I were paid to care in the future, there is absolutely no
way I could use GitHub (due to Terms-of-Service, JS CAPCHA, etc)
and there needs to be a mailing list (e.g. ruby-core) and
(optional) Redmine tracker for me to work on it.
Updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh) almost 2 years ago
Thank you for your reply.
I'm sorry but I cannot afford to hire you and have no bugdet. If I were a billionaire..
Anyway, you are not against the removal of WEBrick from Ruby package.
If you are, let me know.
This is my opinion.
If you are willing to continue to maintain WEBrick, GitHub is not mandatory.
We will keep WEBrick on GitHub, but I think we can transfer the source code to you everytime.
You can maintain it in your own Git server and mailing list, like the unicorn project, if you want.
And I hope so if possible.
@matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto), do you decide the removal of WEBrick?
Updated by ioquatix (Samuel Williams) almost 2 years ago
Personally, I'm in favour of a smaller stdlib. Therefore I support this change.
I also believe that we see more innovation when things are allowed to grow under their own terms rather than part of stdlib.
Updated by naruse (Yui NARUSE) almost 2 years ago
Recently vulnerability handling for webrick is heavy load for CRuby development.
Reports related to webrick is low S/N rate though the importance of bundling webrick with ruby tarball is decreasing.
We remove webrick in ruby repo and separate it as dedicated project.