On Friday, July 11, 2014 11:36:28 AM UTC-7, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote: > > On 11-07-2014 15:34, Jeremy Evans wrote: > > On Friday, July 11, 2014 11:20:41 AM UTC-7, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote: >> >> On 11-07-2014 15:09, Jeremy Evans wrote: >> >> On Friday, July 11, 2014 9:36:22 AM UTC-7, Rodrigo Rosenfeld Rosas wrote: >>> >>> I'm curious. How do you decide when to stop supporting some Ruby >>> version? >>> >>> 1.8.7 has reached EOL from the MRI team and it's no longer supported by >>> newer Rails releases for a while already. It also makes it harder for >>> newcomers to contribute code as they might not even know that the new Hash >>> syntax is not supported by Ruby 1.8, for example. And it's also responsible >>> for things that wouldn't make sense otherwise, like the case for overriding >>> Object#id, which no longer is defined since Ruby 1.9. >>> >> >> I'll remove support for 1.8.7 when it becomes a burden to support it >> (with proper deprecation, of course). I see a significant benefit in >> continuing to support it (allowing people running ruby 1.8.7 to update to >> newer Sequel versions), so there would have to be a significant cost before >> I would remove it. So far, supporting ruby 1.8.7 has not held me back in >> adding any feature I wanted to add, so I haven't seen a significant cost. >> >> Much of the ruby ecosystem still supports ruby 1.8.7, including most of >> the database drivers that Sequel uses. Current versions of pg, mysql2, >> sqlite3, oci8, ibm_db, and sqlanywhere still support it, for example >> (tinytds dropped support). When the common databases drivers stop >> supporting ruby 1.8.7, that will signal to me that it may be time to drop >> support in Sequel. >> >> >> Ok, what about changing the behavior for id to raise if the column does >> not exist? Or to conditionally define id depending whether Ruby is 1.8 or >> newer? >> > > Assuming we wanted to change the behavior, I think only defining the > method on ruby 1.9+ is probably fine. However, this needs to be properly > deprecated for a least one release. Please submit a pull request if you > want to do that. > > > Good to know, but just to be sure I think you meant the opposite of this > phrase: "only defining the method on ruby 1.9+ is probably fine". Actually > we wouldn't define the method on 1.9+, right? >
Right :) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sequel-talk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sequel-talk. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
