upgrade to ruby 2.4.1 #278
Conversation
.ruby-version
Outdated
| @@ -1 +1 @@ | |||
| 2.3.1 | |||
| ruby-2.4.1 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you need to remove ruby; this should just be the version numbers, yes?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually, this file is entirely created by RVM.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, but this file is also used by rbenv and so it should really just contain the version numbers. (The production system uses rbenv, BTW.)
You can have RVM put just the version numbers in there or you can create it manually.
(Note that the content you're replacing only has the version numbers in it.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, rbenv also supports the use of .ruby-version. Does the presence of the "ruby-" string break rbenv? (if you use rbenv in your local env could you check that?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How did the .ruby-version file even get here? You put it in .gitignore in (already merged) PR #273
There was a problem hiding this comment.
re: what is allowed in the .ruby-version file
Short answer: .rbenv expects only the version number in the file. "ruby-" can't be in there.
tldr:
rbenv expects the contents to match the 'name' of one of the ruby versions that it installs. This is the list of 'names' of possible versions that can be installed
(tldr: the list is provided via ruby-build).
patmbolger
force-pushed
the
ruby-2.4.1#147050603
branch
from
89862aa to
12b5bee
Compare
patmbolger
force-pushed
the
ruby-2.4.1#147050603
branch
from
60d04a0 to
c5f3370
Compare
PT Story: https://www.pivotaltracker.com/story/show/147050603
Ready for review:
@weedySeaDragon @RobertCram @thesuss