-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 62
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Ruby]: Ruby / Messages bump #165
Conversation
ruby/cucumber-gherkin.gemspec
Outdated
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ Gem::Specification.new do |s| | |||
'source_code_uri' => 'https://github.com/cucumber/gherkin/blob/main/ruby' | |||
} | |||
|
|||
s.add_runtime_dependency 'cucumber-messages', '>= 19.1.4', '< 22.1' | |||
s.add_runtime_dependency 'cucumber-messages', '~> 22.0' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As nothing materially changed about the messages for Gherkin, is there a reason not to increase the upper bound instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As in permit 19.1 but increase the upper limit to say 23?
Currently the maximum version is 22.0 so any revision in the 22.x should be fine here. Just trying to reduce the support surface area. In theory we could keep this support area the same?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes. Allowing a wider range allows us to make major releases of messages without also making major releases of Gherkin.
This reduces the churn somewhat. Wouldn't worry about supported version ranges here. If something Gherkin related gets added to messages we'll have to use it in all Gherkin implementations (because of the single test suite).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I mean in theory nothing stops us from setting the upper limit to 30 by the same logic. Or having no upper limit.
Bundler flags things without an upper limit hence the twiddle key. In theory something could come in v23 which breaks things hence setting this value?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah I would think '>= 19.1.4', '< 23'
should be good.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'll make that change now.
@mpkorstanje - Ideally we would add in another breaking change for ruby alongside this, to kill 2 birds with one stone before releasing. If you're happy to hold off a short amount of time |
In other news @mpkorstanje this is one that's slipped through. As this should trigger all ruby tests. I'll have a look to see the changes and see if I can work it out |
@luke-hill I've pushed some changes to minimize the diff. Also fixed the ruby tests no running for PR's on main. Thanks! |
f1a8d94
to
65e36f1
Compare
🤔 What's changed?
Bumped minimum messages / ruby ver
⚡️ What's your motivation?
🏷️ What kind of change is this?
♻️ Anything particular you want feedback on?
📋 Checklist:
This text was originally generated from a template, then edited by hand. You can modify the template here.