On 08/01/2020 10:20, Pirate Praveen wrote: > On ബു, Jan 8, 2020 at 10:00, Matijs van Zuijlen <matijs@matijs.net> wrote: >> On 07/01/2020 20:49, Pirate Praveen wrote: >>> >>> >>> On ബു, Jan 8, 2020 at 01:16, Pirate Praveen <praveen@onenetbeyond.org> >>> wrote: >>>> ruby-aws-sdk 2 -> 3 is huge change. >>> >>> It adds 220 new dependencies for example. >>> >>> https://rubygems.org/gems/aws-sdk-resources >>> >>> >> >> gitlab should probably only depend on the bits it uses. > > Yes, it is already requested to update to ruby-aws-sdk v3. > https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/issues/37931 That is good to hear! > What I'm opposed to is assuming a major update don't break things > without actually testing reverse dependencies. And some people > portraying time to test compatibility as blocking progress. Was any > update indefinitely blocked by gitlab maintainers till now? > > If we start doing the same with all the gitlab dependncies (upload major > versions without testing reverse dependencies), that will not be pretty > for the team. And it is totally demotivating to show gitlab package only > as a blocker without considering the huge amount of work we do to > maintain a lot of libraries (not just ruby, but even core build tools > like webpack. and rollup for node). We updated rails to version 5 even > when gitlab was not ready for rails 5 and in that process got gitlab > removed from testing and backports. I agree completely. I think there's a general problem with major updates. For most gems, these result in breaking changes. For C libraries, these are handled by creating separate packages that include some number in the name. Would this provide a solution for Ruby as well? By having, e.g., a ruby-rails-5 or ruby-rails-5-2 package, and similarly for the present case a ruby-aws-sdk-2 and ruby-aws-sdk-3 package. (Another example where the current system is breaking is with cucumber. Cucumber 3 can no longer be packaged because it depends on cucumber-expressions 6, whereas the ruby-cucumber-expressions package has been updated to version 8 already). Kind regards, Matijs
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature