-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 19
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update gem versions in modules #152
Changes from all commits
3231df4
72e4ea2
e66bc41
19a4eed
c3abff2
84ed7c9
313c83b
8f1a856
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -3,14 +3,11 @@ | |
|
||
source 'https://rubygems.org' | ||
|
||
gem 'puppet', ENV['PUPPET_GEM_VERSION'] || '>= 5.5', groups: ['development', 'test'] | ||
gem 'puppet', ENV.fetch('PUPPET_GEM_VERSION', '>= 7'), groups: ['development', 'test'] | ||
gem 'rake' | ||
|
||
<% (@configs['required'] + (@configs['extra'] || [])).each do |gem| -%> | ||
gem '<%= gem['gem'] %>'<%= ", '#{gem['version']}'" if gem['version'] %><%= ", #{gem['options'].inspect}" if gem['options'] %><%= " if RUBY_VERSION #{gem['ruby_version']}" if (gem['ruby_version']) %> | ||
<% end -%> | ||
|
||
# Pin rdoc to prevent updating bundled psych (https://github.com/ruby/rdoc/commit/ebe185c8775b2afe844eb3da6fa78adaa79e29a4) | ||
gem 'rdoc', '< 6.4' | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Should we keep this on Ruby 2 in to prevent updating psych on Ruby 2.7? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Probably a good idea. There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I'm going to merge it without it and then see |
||
|
||
# vim:ft=ruby |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I guess this is so that "no changes to main branch for 60 days" doesn't disable the workflow?
Should we have a second workflow that is doing just
schedule
?(non-blocking)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I also debated that. In practice I rarely look at it and @ehelms wasn't even aware that we had it. So for now I'm leaning to keeping it disabled.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
k, wfm
(I did use it the other day when for some reason the
centos:stream8
container stopped booting out of a sudden to double check that it really worked a few hours ago, but then again this was probably the only use of it by me :D)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I also used the other day to see that puppet-katello was already failing before I got started, but I wonder if it still makes sense. At least with the reusable workflows we'll have less duplication if we have 2 separate files.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
technically, you could even re-use a re-usable workflow:
ci.yml.erb
becomesworkflow.yml.erb
withon: workflow_call
and then we haveci.yml
andcron.yml
that both call that…or you use ERB to generate two "identical" files with different
on
statements.or I shut up and we get it in as is and think later how to overengineer this ;)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You may be able to trick modulesync with using a symlink and read
__FILE__
in theon
condition. Does that qualify as overengineering? ;)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's a "smart" solution. "smart" solutions tend to explode in spectacular ways down the road. ;-)