From: v.ondruch@...
Date: 2013-02-16T02:24:19+09:00
Subject: [ruby-core:52289] Re: p385 breaks bakward compatibility
------=_Part_135_13223376.1360946229260
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_Part_136_14286065.1360946229260"
------=_Part_136_14286065.1360946229260
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dne p=C3=A1tek, 15. =C3=BAnora 2013 12:20:18 UTC+1 Alex Chaffee napsal(a):
>
> 1. Your Gemfile doesn't specify any sources. If it did, Bundler could fin=
d=20
> whatever version of rdoc it needs. Read=20
> http://gembundler.com/man/gemfile.5.html=20
>
Not sure what is the relevance here
=20
>
> 2. Your Gemfile.lock file is probably locking to a version of rdoc that=
=20
> doesn't exist in your new installation of Ruby. Do "bundle update" to res=
et=20
> your Gemfile.lock.=20
>
Clearly not, because I update Ruby in the meantime, therefor RDoc 3.9.4=20
were replaced by RDoc 3.9.5, that is the point. I don't want to run bundle=
=20
update. Note that I am speaking as of packager of Ruby on Fedora. There is=
=20
no way for me to know where are you application installed and how to call=
=20
"bundle update" on them.
=20
>
> 3. Updating Ruby is not guaranteed to copy over old gems into your new=20
> installation. RVM can be told to do this but it appears that yum does not=
.=20
>
This is irrelevant. RDoc is bundled in Ruby and I worked with plain Ruby=20
installation.=20
>
> 4. My version of Bundler warns me when my Gemfile has no sources when I d=
o=20
> "bundle install". Since you never ran "bundle install" (despite it clearl=
y=20
> telling you to) I have no idea if you're using the latest version. Do "ge=
m=20
> update bundler" to install the latest.=20
>
> 5. Dot releases are not guaranteed not to break anything. Read semver.org=
for one (popular, but not mandatory) interpretation of what release numbers=
=20
> should promise.=20
>
Yes, semver guarantees that, but bundler does not reflect that, since the=
=20
versions are locked. I have to do something more, such as "bundle update"=
=20
to actually update my application
=20
>
> 6. Gems are kind of complicated, but once you understand the basics,=20
> they're pretty easy to use. I see no bug here, just you misunderstanding=
=20
> the tools.=20
>
I know what gems are ... but you live just in gems world. I live in the=20
world where gems are repackaged and somebody relies that nothing breaks due=
=20
to update and I don't have to run some additional commands due to update.
=20
>
> 7. You do realize what version numbers are for, right? Version numbers=20
> identify versions. If the code changes, even to fix a bug, it's not the=
=20
> same code, which means it's a different version. So it needs a new versio=
n=20
> number.=20
>
Yes, I do realize. And therefore Bundler should respect ~> dependency and=
=20
automatically pickup newer version, not just rely on Gemfile.lock.
V=C3=ADt=20
------=_Part_136_14286065.1360946229260
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dne p=C3=A1tek, 15. =C3=BAnora 2013 12:20:18 UTC+1 Alex Chaffee nap=
sal(a):
= 1. Your Gemfile doesn't specify any sources. If it did, Bundler could find = whatever version of rdoc it needs. Read <= a href=3D"http://gembundler.com/man/gemfile.5.html" target=3D"_blank">http:= //gembundler.com/man/gemfile.5.html Not sure what is the relevance here
2. Your Gemfile.lock f= ile is probably locking to a version of rdoc that doesn't exist in your new= installation of Ruby. Do "bundle update" to reset your Gemfile.lock. =
<= span style=3D"font-family:'.HelveticaNeueUI';font-size:15px;line-height:19p= x;white-space:nowrap">3. Updat= ing Ruby is not guaranteed to copy over old gems into your new installation= . RVM can be told to do this but it appears that yum does not. =
<= br>4. My version of Bundler warns = me when my Gemfile has no sources when I do "bundle install". Since you nev= er ran "bundle install" (despite it clearly telling you to) I have no idea = if you're using the latest version. Do "gem update bundler" to install the = latest.5. Dot releases are not guaranteed not to break any= thing. Read semver.org = for one (popular, but not mandatory) interpretation of what release numbers= should promise.
6. Gems are kind of complica= ted, but once you understand the basics, they're pretty easy to use. I see = no bug here, just you misunderstanding the tools.
I know what gems are ... but you live just in gems world. I l= ive in the world where gems are repackaged and somebody relies that nothing= breaks due to update and I don't have to run some additional commands due = to update.
7. You do realize what version numbers are for, righ= t? Version numbers identify versions. If the code changes, even to fix a bu= g, it's not the same code, which means it's a different version. So it need= s a new version number.
Yes, I do re= alize. And therefore Bundler should respect ~> dependency and automatica= lly pickup newer version, not just rely on Gemfile.lock.
V=C3=AD= t
------=_Part_136_14286065.1360946229260-- ------=_Part_135_13223376.1360946229260--