Revise gem update process #3354
Conversation
👷 Deploy Preview for chef-server processing.
|
| DO NOT update this file unless Rails is upgraded. | ||
| Due to the Rails version, we've locked a lot of dependencies. Make | ||
| sure we can build and run oc-id before merging to main. | ||
| You'll need the libsqlite3-dev library if doing this on Ubuntu. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks like the last line might be a comment for depsolver? The rest of it can be removed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the line referencing oc-id or depselector? What should the convention be, to place the comment line above the line it references, or below it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The comment is usually above the line that is refers to.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm slightly confused. The comments that I removed... I assumed they referred to oc-id/Gemfile lock. But they were below the oc-id/Gemfile.lock line, and were with the other line we are talking about now. Which line does the entire group of comments go with?
lbakerchef
force-pushed
the
lbaker/update-frequenttasks
branch
from
c691b6c
to
b9faa7d
Compare
lbakerchef
force-pushed
the
lbaker/update-frequenttasks
branch
from
b9faa7d
to
118cc4f
Compare
Signed-off-by: Lincoln Baker <lbaker@chef.io>
PrajaktaPurohit
force-pushed
the
lbaker/update-frequenttasks
branch
from
e98dd3d
to
297ea1b
Compare
|
Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!
|
Inward facing docs revision.
oc-idcan now be updated without any specialRailssteps.