Only support Ruby 2.2+ and JRuby 9.0.0.0+ #552

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jun 19, 2015

Conversation

Projects
None yet
4 participants
@benlangfeld
Member

benlangfeld commented Jun 15, 2015

Drop attempts at support for Rubinius

@benlangfeld benlangfeld added this to the 3.0.0 milestone Jun 15, 2015

@bklang

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bklang

bklang Jun 15, 2015

Member

Does JRuby 1.7 support Ruby 2.2 syntax?

Member

bklang commented Jun 15, 2015

Does JRuby 1.7 support Ruby 2.2 syntax?

@benlangfeld

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@benlangfeld

benlangfeld Jun 15, 2015

Member

No, that is why I specified JRuby 9.0.0.0+

Member

benlangfeld commented Jun 15, 2015

No, that is why I specified JRuby 9.0.0.0+

@emcgee

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@emcgee

emcgee Jun 15, 2015

Contributor

FYI, I've seen a lot of segfault errors with Ruby 2.2.2 - celluloid/celluloid#625 (comment)

A simple reproduction was just to let ahn connect via Rayo to FS and then just idle. Eventually it would die with the error described above.

Haven't had time to dig further into it and report a bug back to ruby-lang or similar.

Contributor

emcgee commented Jun 15, 2015

FYI, I've seen a lot of segfault errors with Ruby 2.2.2 - celluloid/celluloid#625 (comment)

A simple reproduction was just to let ahn connect via Rayo to FS and then just idle. Eventually it would die with the error described above.

Haven't had time to dig further into it and report a bug back to ruby-lang or similar.

.travis.yml
- - 2.1.0
- - jruby
- - rbx-2.1.1
+ - 2.2.2

This comment has been minimized.

@JustinAiken

JustinAiken Jun 16, 2015

Member

Why no 2.2.0 or 2.2.1 ?

@JustinAiken

JustinAiken Jun 16, 2015

Member

Why no 2.2.0 or 2.2.1 ?

This comment has been minimized.

@benlangfeld

benlangfeld Jun 16, 2015

Member

Fixed.

@JustinAiken

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@JustinAiken

JustinAiken Jun 16, 2015

Member

I like it! Rails 5 and Adhearsion 3, helping kill off old Rubies one travis matrix at a time!

Member

JustinAiken commented Jun 16, 2015

I like it! Rails 5 and Adhearsion 3, helping kill off old Rubies one travis matrix at a time!

@benlangfeld

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@benlangfeld

benlangfeld Jun 16, 2015

Member

@emcgee I'm blocking this on #527. Hopefully that should help. I'd appreciate your feedback again once that is done.

Member

benlangfeld commented Jun 16, 2015

@emcgee I'm blocking this on #527. Hopefully that should help. I'd appreciate your feedback again once that is done.

@benlangfeld

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@benlangfeld

benlangfeld Jun 19, 2015

Member

@emcgee The upgrade to Celluloid 0.16 is complete, and so this is now unblocked. I'd appreciate your feedback on how things look now.

Member

benlangfeld commented Jun 19, 2015

@emcgee The upgrade to Celluloid 0.16 is complete, and so this is now unblocked. I'd appreciate your feedback on how things look now.

@emcgee

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@emcgee

emcgee Jun 19, 2015

Contributor

@benlangfeld I'll put this onto a staging server immediately that sees light usage and monitor it.

Contributor

emcgee commented Jun 19, 2015

@benlangfeld I'll put this onto a staging server immediately that sees light usage and monitor it.

@bklang

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@bklang

bklang Jun 19, 2015

Member

@emcgee Heads up that Adhearsion's develop branch is now Adhearsion 3 and contains breaking changes. If you want to test this, make sure you're using the support/2.x.x branch.

@benlangfeld Did the appropriate merge get to support/2.x.x? Is that even possible?

Member

bklang commented Jun 19, 2015

@emcgee Heads up that Adhearsion's develop branch is now Adhearsion 3 and contains breaking changes. If you want to test this, make sure you're using the support/2.x.x branch.

@benlangfeld Did the appropriate merge get to support/2.x.x? Is that even possible?

@benlangfeld

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@benlangfeld

benlangfeld Jun 19, 2015

Member

No, support/2.x.x will not receive these changes, as this would require coordination with Punchblock versioning.

Member

benlangfeld commented Jun 19, 2015

No, support/2.x.x will not receive these changes, as this would require coordination with Punchblock versioning.

@emcgee

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@emcgee

emcgee Jun 19, 2015

Contributor

@bklang Not a problem - saw those changes and I'll make the modifications on this side. Who am I to stand in the way of progress.

Contributor

emcgee commented Jun 19, 2015

@bklang Not a problem - saw those changes and I'll make the modifications on this side. Who am I to stand in the way of progress.

Only support Ruby 2.2+ and JRuby 9.0.0.0+
Drop attempts at support for Rubinius

benlangfeld added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 19, 2015

@benlangfeld benlangfeld merged commit 062c15f into develop Jun 19, 2015

1 of 2 checks passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build is in progress
Details
continuous-integration/travis-ci/push The Travis CI build passed
Details

@benlangfeld benlangfeld deleted the feature/ruby-version-support branch Jun 19, 2015

@emcgee

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@emcgee

emcgee Jun 23, 2015

Contributor

@benlangfeld Follow up on this - I ran a stripped down version of our platform on this for the last 4 days on 2.2.2 with no random segfaults. Much other was broken, naturally, but calls completed as ussual with no issues. I'd consider celluloid/celluloid#625 (comment) to be closed by this.

Contributor

emcgee commented Jun 23, 2015

@benlangfeld Follow up on this - I ran a stripped down version of our platform on this for the last 4 days on 2.2.2 with no random segfaults. Much other was broken, naturally, but calls completed as ussual with no issues. I'd consider celluloid/celluloid#625 (comment) to be closed by this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment