Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2021 17:31:50 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: ruby@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 258108] [exp-run] devel/ruby-gems: Update to 3.2.30 (Fixes for Ruby 3.0) Message-ID: <bug-258108-21402-U3KeYSuNVE@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-258108-21402@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-258108-21402@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D258108 --- Comment #45 from deivid.rodriguez@riseup.net --- > I thought it would help to know about the difficulties encountered > when updating the port, and also to help anyone reading the PR know > what would be relevant to the attached patch or not (also to avoid > delay like a potential reviewer thinking that the issue discussed was > related to the patch). This was my intention at least, but I probably > gave too much context. I wrote earlier that I was thankful for your > work and this is still true :-) It's alright, the context is indeed useful, sorry if I sounded harsh and th= anks for your kind words :) I released rubygems 3.2.33 with the last patch. > Note: I didn't update to RubyGems 3.2.32 yet, because it looks like > 3.2.31 vendors more libraries, for example `optparse' from Ruby but > with some modifications like renaming the class from `OptionParser' to > `Gem::OptionParser'. I'll have to reread porter handbook to know if > this should be "unvendored". Yeah, unfortunately, as more standard libraries that we use internally get converted into gems, we need to vendor them, because we can't have any dependencies ourselves because otherwise we would restrict user's choice of= the dependency to the version that we use internally. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-258108-21402-U3KeYSuNVE>