Move ssl_options & auth options into constructor

[jimmidyson]

No description provided.

[abonas]

@jimmidyson, please make sure the readme is aligned with this change, I'd like to release a new gem ver. with latest commits. thanks!

[jimmidyson]

@abonas I think it is aligned with this change, isn't it?

[abonas]

@abonas I think it is aligned with this change, isn't it?

I'm not saying it's not :) , I just wanted to make sure it is fully updated before releasing a new version, as once a gem is released, if it's unusable, it's hard to get rid of it (you need to yank it on rubygems, but can't reupload it unless you bump version again)

[simon3z]

@jimmidyson @abonas thanks for this fix (cc @oschreib ), we actually require this ASAP (let's wait for Mooli's changes and then let's build a new gem)

[abonas]

@jimmidyson @abonas thanks for this fix (cc @oschreib ), we actually require this ASAP (let's wait for Mooli's changes and then let's build a new gem)

@simon3z , this was released as part of 0.2.0 so to use it, either 0.2.0 or 0.3.0 can be taken.
I am probably missing something in your comment above :)
v0.1.17...v0.2.0

[simon3z]

@abonas apparently this commit also carries a fix (that shouldn't have been part of the patch):

5cf2c3a#diff-78cbcd17c7ae3f02081ec1ce253bb73bR43

cc @jimmidyson

Now we find ourselves in a situation where we can't bump from v0.1.17 (and fix the to_s part in ManageIQ) without carrying in also all the ssl_options changes. Which is something that Mooli is working on.

[simon3z]

@abonas so what I meant is to wait for @moolitayer's patch and build right away because we're not only introducing quota and limits but also fixing an important issue. (This is the effect of not having a stable branch, which anyway is too early to have).

[jimmidyson]

@simon3z Moving to ssl_options should be a case of just moving the previous ssl_options into your .new call?

[simon3z]

@jimmidyson yes I wanted to fix the to_s part without having to move to the new API. It will be easier in the future when we'll have a stable branch.

[simon3z]

@jimmidyson only problem here was the lack of awareness of an important issue that should be filed/resolved separately.

[jimmidyson]

@simon3z I'd personally just be happy that the fix is there :)