Dne 03. 11. 22 v 17:13 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):
Vít Ondruch wrote on 2022/11/04 0:37:Dne 03. 11. 22 v 15:37 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):Vít Ondruch wrote on 2022/11/03 22:22:Dne 03. 11. 22 v 14:07 Mamoru TASAKA napsal(a):Vít Ondruch wrote on 2022/11/03 21:19:I have provided negative karma for F37 for the moment: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-f7975d0e6aHowever, not sure if it is not too late already, since the update was submitted for stable. Mamoru, could you please check the status and our options here?VítThis is:https://github.com/rspec/rspec-mocks/commit/e931e818b577172b89fb4583fc336fbcd25df36bi.e. to ”emphasize" the difference between keyword v.s. hashThx for pointing out the exact commit.I "think" the package seeing errors due to the above change need fixing anyway,No doubt about it, the only question is when :)howeverTo distinguish "keywords" v.s. "hash" with ruby 3.x seems generally weigh too difficult...As Fedora 37 is not released yet, and is going to be maintained for 13 months,I think fixing F37 packages seeing the above error is desirableIn this case, can we postpone landing the F37 update and include fixes for the affected packages into the update?(I wish the notifications were not delayed by one week, but hopefully, the FMN is going to be fixed soon).(and on the other hand, I am not going to upgrade F36 rspec series to 3.12.x)I support that, thx. VítWell, the simplest solution for now is to revert the above change on F-37.You mean the rspec-mocks commit? That is interesting idea.Yes, I mean that (i.e. revert e931e818b577172b89fb4583fc336fbcd25df36b on Fedora 37 rubygem-rspec-mocks rpm). Koschei should report errors on rawhide (for rspec consumerrpms) anyway.
Sounds good to me. We can re-enable this once we catch all the issues in Rawhide and patches are ready.
Thx Vít
MamoruIn the man time, I have fixed rubygem-notiffany, but there seems to be several more:https://koschei.fedoraproject.org/search?q=ruby&order_by=state-f38%2Crunning%2Cfailing%2Cnamerubygem-listen rubygem-guard rubygem-guard-livereload rubygem-memfs And that actually might be it. I'll try to take look at listen. Vít _______________________________________________ ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.orgFedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelinesList Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue_______________________________________________ ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.orgFedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelinesList Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
