Avoid need for Base64 gem at runtime

[Bo98]

This follows a common practice that's been adopted by the majority of the Ruby community: rubocop/rubocop@b2b29da, rack/rack@696ed9e, lostisland/faraday@9487833, octokit/octokit.rb@a787bf4.

The personal reason for my need for this is that bootsnap doesn't seem to work properly on Ruby < 3.4 when using base64, which is preventing me from using json_schemer 2.2.x:

<internal:/ruby/3.3.1/lib/ruby/3.3.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb>:37:in `require': cannot load such file -- /vendor/bundle/ruby/3.3.0/gems/base64-0.2.0/lib/base64.rb (LoadError)
	from <internal:/ruby/3.3.1/lib/ruby/3.3.0/rubygems/core_ext/kernel_require.rb>:37:in `require'
	from /vendor/bundle/ruby/3.3.0/gems/bootsnap-1.18.3/lib/bootsnap/load_path_cache/core_ext/kernel_require.rb:30:in `require'

This is technically a Bundler/Bootsnap problem, but I felt it was worthwhile reducing the dependency tree here anyway.

[Bo98]

macos-latest failure on Ruby 2.5 is expected since macos-latest now points to an arm64 runner: https://github.blog/changelog/2024-05-20-actions-upcoming-changes-to-github-hosted-macos-runners/.

Only Ruby >= 2.6 is supported there: ruby/setup-ruby@e8677f0

[davishmcclurg]

Hi @Bo98—thanks for opening this!

If I understand correctly, base64 will still be bundled with Ruby in 3.4—though not as a default gem. I'm a bit sad to see code getting more confusing (ie, what does unpack1("m0") mean?) in order to remove a gem dependency that ships with Ruby. Do you know of any discussion around bundled gem use in libraries? Are library authors meant to avoid using them?

This is a pretty small change, though, so I'm ok merging it if it makes it easier to use the library.

Thanks for looking into that Ruby 2.5 failure—I'll clean that up as part of #178.

[Bo98]

If I understand correctly, base64 will still be bundled with Ruby in 3.4—though not as a default gem. I'm a bit sad to see code getting more confusing (ie, what does unpack1("m0") mean?) in order to remove a gem dependency that ships with Ruby. Do you know of any discussion around bundled gem use in libraries? Are library authors meant to avoid using them?

Bundled gems are competely ignored with Bundler so the behaviour from Ruby 3.4 is it will be that base64 will be a dependency that is always downloaded from RubyGems. This already happens in some cases on 3.3 and earlier if the default gem doesn't exactly match the latest version of base64 hosted on RubyGems.

I'm OK to close this though if you prefer the extra dependency for readability.

[davishmcclurg]

Bundled gems are competely ignored with Bundler so the behaviour from Ruby 3.4 is it will be that base64 will be a dependency that is always downloaded from RubyGems. This already happens in some cases on 3.3 and earlier if the default gem doesn't exactly match the latest version of base64 hosted on RubyGems.

Oh I didn't realize that—thanks for the clarification.

I'm OK to close this though if you prefer the extra dependency for readability.

No, I think this is good if bundler treats it as a regular dependency. I'll merge. Thanks for the contribution!

[davishmcclurg]

This has been released in 2.3.0.