[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-636?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13266138#comment-13266138
]
Antoine Toulme commented on BUILDR-636:
---------------------------------------
I can explain why this is the case. Back when Buildr started, it was not mean
to be an application, not a library.
As such, it was tested with a known set of libraries.
We actually had issues relaxing version numbers before, as we ran into
incompatibilities with released versions of Buildr with newer gems that broke
their APIs. We relied more extensively on the ~> flag than the >= flag for that
reason.
So a way to keep using Buildr is to use it inside a RVM gemset ? Unless you use
Buildr as a library ? Then we need to talk about your needs some more, and your
patches to make this more flexible are definitely welcome.
> Do not set hard version numbers for gem dependencies unless absolutely
> necessary
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: BUILDR-636
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BUILDR-636
> Project: Buildr
> Issue Type: Dependency upgrade
> Affects Versions: 1.4.6, 1.4.7
> Reporter: Russell Teabeault
>
> I am finding more and more that buildr's gem dependencies are causing
> conflicts with my own project's gem requirements. This is typically because
> the version in the gemspec is set to a specific version instead of a minimum
> version.
> For example in buildr.gemspec,
> spec.add_dependency 'rake', '0.8.7'
> probably should be
> spec.add_dependency 'rake', '>= 0.8.7'
> unless there is a good reason that it only works with rake 0.8.7.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
