[#102393] [Ruby master Feature#17608] Compact and sum in one step — sawadatsuyoshi@...

Issue #17608 has been reported by sawa (Tsuyoshi Sawada).

13 messages 2021/02/04

[#102438] [Ruby master Bug#17619] if false foo=42; end creates a foo local variable set to nil — pkmuldoon@...

Issue #17619 has been reported by pkmuldoon (Phil Muldoon).

10 messages 2021/02/10

[#102631] [Ruby master Feature#17660] Expose information about which basic methods have been redefined — tenderlove@...

Issue #17660 has been reported by tenderlovemaking (Aaron Patterson).

9 messages 2021/02/27

[#102639] [Ruby master Misc#17662] The herdoc pattern used in tests does not syntax highlight correctly in many editors — eregontp@...

Issue #17662 has been reported by Eregon (Benoit Daloze).

13 messages 2021/02/27

[#102652] [Ruby master Bug#17664] Behavior of sockets changed in Ruby 3.0 to non-blocking — ciconia@...

Issue #17664 has been reported by ciconia (Sharon Rosner).

23 messages 2021/02/28

[ruby-core:102497] [Ruby master Misc#17499] Documentation backporting

From: zverok.offline@...
Date: 2021-02-15 07:18:44 UTC
List: ruby-core #102497
Issue #17499 has been updated by zverok (Victor Shepelev).


@usa 

> You should create the backport ticket on redmine (this site) as "Bug" tracker and "Closed" status, with "REQUIRED" backport status.

Unfortunately, I don't have enough rights to use statuses other than `Open`, neither to fill the `Backport` field.

----------------------------------------
Misc #17499: Documentation backporting
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/17499#change-90391

* Author: zverok (Victor Shepelev)
* Status: Closed
* Priority: Normal
----------------------------------------
I recently noticed that the documentation created after `x.y` release (even 1 day after) never reflected at `docs.ruby-lang.org/<x.y>.0/`.

In discussion [here](https://github.com/ruby/docs.ruby-lang.org/issues/111) I was educated by @hsbt that the source of `docs.ruby-lang.org/<x.y>.0/` is actually a branch `ruby_<x_y>`, so in order to appear at docs.ruby-lang.org, documentation should be "backported" into the proper branch, which usually does not happen.

A few examples (documentation submitted by me, but it is not that I consider "my" documentation the most important, it is just easier for me to track):
* `doc/syntax/pattern_matching.rdoc`: [merged](https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/2786) on 2020-02-23, but is not represented here: https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/2.7.0/ -- because it isn't present in [ruby_2_7](https://github.com/ruby/ruby/tree/ruby_2_7/doc/syntax) branch.
* update `doc/syntax/methods.rdoc` (add endless methods and `...`-forwarding): [merged](https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/3997) 2020-12-25 (just a few hours after 3.0 release), but not represented here: https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/3.0.0/doc/syntax/methods_rdoc.html -- because it isn't in [ruby_3_0](https://github.com/ruby/ruby/blob/ruby_3_0/doc/syntax/methods.rdoc) branch.

**IMPORTANT**: It is just two random examples, I believe there are numerous problems like that.

I wonder how this should be addressed:
* should somebody gather all the occurrences to "commits that should be picked into the proper branches"?
* can it be done in some systematic manner?
* can at least currently developed (3.0's) enhancements be "backported" in some automatic manner (PR labels?..)



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

Unsubscribe: <mailto:ruby-core-request@ruby-lang.org?subject=unsubscribe>
<http://lists.ruby-lang.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/ruby-core>

In This Thread

Prev Next