https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Bundler_2.0
== Summary ==
Upgrade to Bundler 2.0, the latest stable gem version.
== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:pvalena | Pavel Valena]], [[User:vondruch | Vit Ondruch]]
* Email: pval...@redhat.com, vondr...@redhat.com
== Detailed Description ==
Bundler 2 is ne
Why do we want to keep old version around?
On Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 20:12 Ben Cotton wrote:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Bundler_2.0
>
> == Summary ==
> Upgrade to Bundler 2.0, the latest stable gem version.
>
> == Owner ==
> * Name: [[User:pvalena | Pavel Valena]], [[User:vondruch | Vi
I think that we will end-up with this slightly edited version of the
proposal :)
> Keep Bundler 1.16 as rubygem-bundler1 subpackage of ruby package.
The problem is that Ruby ships with bundled Bundler 1.x and RubyGems
depends Bundler 1.x. Although I'm not sure how tight the coupling is :/
Upstrea
- Original Message -
> From: "Vít Ondruch"
> To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2019 8:45:12 AM
> Subject: Re: Fedora 31 Self-Contained Change proposal: Bundler 2.0
>
>
>
> I think that we will end-up with this sligh
Thanks for clarifying!
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 1:34 PM Pavel Valena wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Vít Ondruch"
> > To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2019 8:45:12 AM
> > Subject: Re: Fedora 31 Sel
There are 2 Ruby modules 2.5 and 2.6.
Ruby 2.5 module has rubygem-bundler in it.
How about keeping the rubygem-bundler as 1.X?
--
Jun Aruga | He - His - Him
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 5:09 PM Jun Aruga wrote:
>
> There are 2 Ruby modules 2.5 and 2.6.
> Ruby 2.5 module has rubygem-bundler in it.
> How about keeping the rubygem-bundler as 1.X?
Guidelines say that if you want multiple versions, unversioned version
should be the latest. So rubygem-bundler s
