Is it reasonable to assume that any rack release that includes bumping
the ruby requirement to 2.2.2 would require a major version bump of
rack?

The dependency in the unicorn gemspec could be as simple as '< 2' if
that is the case.

On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 4:56 PM, Aaron Patterson
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 01:50:46PM -0800, Aaron Patterson wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 07:18:07PM +0000, Eric Wong wrote:
>> > Adam Duke <[email protected]> wrote:
>> > > From: Adam Duke <[email protected]>
>> > > Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 13:06:31 -0500
>> > > Subject: [PATCH] limit rack version for ruby compatibility
>> > >
>> > > rack introduced a dependency on ruby 2.2.2 or greater in
>> > > https://github.com/rack/rack/commit/771d94e5dbe53058160a1f8a4cc56384c1d2a048
>> >
>> > Cc-ing rack-devel + Aaron
>> >
>> > Yikes!  ruby-core still supports Ruby 2.1 and possibly even 2.0.0
>> >
>> > And there doesn't seem to be any documentation on why Ruby 2.2.x
>> > is needed in the first place for rack.git
>> > commit a2fe30a5e70371c89c1b29fdc2dc5f8027bc5fe6
>> >
>> >     http://bogomips.org/mirrors/rack.git/patch?id=a2fe30a5e70371c8
>> >
>> > Aaron?
>>
>> The main reason I bumped it up to Ruby 2.2.x is because that will be the
>> minimum version of Ruby I'll be stuck with throughout Rack 2.x's
>> lifetime.  IOW, I can't drop Ruby versions in anything but a major
>> release so I'm being conservative and only going with the latest (at the
>> time that was 2.2).
>>
>> I could be convinced to bring down the version number, but I'd like to
>> know why first. :)
>
> Oh, I forgot to mention that I don't mind eliminating the Ruby version
> requirement as long as we put something in the README that says we only
> guarantee it works on 2.2.x and up.  Older versions could be "best
> effort".  I'm just afraid to do something like that because I really
> don't want to maintain 1.8 and 1.9 baggage (for example).  I used the
> gemspec to clearly announce the Ruby versions I actually test with.
>
> --
> Aaron Patterson
> http://tenderlovemaking.com/

Reply via email to