[RFE] Do not ship `bin/{setup,console}` by default

[voxik]

Packaging Ruby 3.1, the linter on RPM package reports issues such as:

ruby-bundled-gems.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/gems/gems/debug-1.4.0/bin/console 644 /usr/bin/env ruby
ruby-bundled-gems.x86_64: E: non-executable-script /usr/share/gems/gems/debug-1.4.0/bin/gentest 644 /usr/bin/env ruby

There were already multiple similar issues reported previously, such as:

ruby/power_assert#35
ruby/rake#385
ruby/rbs#673

Part of the issue is also that Ruby's rbinstall does not respect the file permissions:

https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/17840

This leads me to the $SUBJECT, which could be reworded as "is it worth of shipping the bin directory", which is the least useful directory for gem runtime?

But checking the situation, e.g.:

https://github.com/ruby/debug/blob/97bf5a0704da9a015825909a7456cebfcbc782a2/debug.gemspec#L20-L24

https://github.com/ruby/net-ftp/blob/7dc2312860c80508ad2e74fe62c19c177862b5ac/net-ftp.gemspec#L27-L29

Maybe the original request could be extended, because I wonder if the whole concept of the listing files isn't bit obsolete? Shouldn't the file list be automatically populated by conventions, which were IMO established during the years? Or at minimum, shouldn't there be some helper method(s), which could be used to populate the file list without the cryptic RegExes?

[simi]

🤔 What is RFE? For actual RFC you can open one at https://github.com/rubygems/rfcs.

[voxik]

thinking What is RFE?

Request For Enhancement

[simi]

Is there any difference? This request fits our RFC repo IMHO.

[voxik]

@hsbt the #5259 is actually good start 👍 thx!