Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Prepare 0.4.4 release
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
@sferik
sferik committed Apr 2, 2013
1 parent 3075c59 commit 2219362
Showing 1 changed file with 1 addition and 1 deletion.
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion delayed_job_active_record.gemspec
View file
Expand Up @@ -15,5 +15,5 @@ Gem::Specification.new do |spec|
spec.require_paths = ['lib']
spec.summary = 'ActiveRecord backend for DelayedJob'
spec.test_files = Dir.glob("spec/**/*")
spec.version = '0.4.3'
spec.version = '0.4.4'
end

6 comments on commit 2219362

@albus522
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What are you doing? I just spent 2 days making this not necessary?

@sferik
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@sferik sferik commented on 2219362 Apr 2, 2013

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Making what not necessary? New gem versions? I wanted to fix the regressions introduced in 0.4.2/0.4.3 as soon as possible with the minimum diff to fix the bug (so as not to introduce new issues). I announced my intent to do this yesterday: #40.

I'm happy to ship 0.4.5 or 0.5.0 or 1.0.0 or 4.0.0 (whatever you want to call it) with your latest changes from #49, including compatibility with multiple versions of rails and delayed_job. I just wanted to push a fix to the existing issue immediately.

@albus522
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ok, I get wanting to push a fix, but the code you pushed as 0.4.4 has only 3 minor differences from master. A conditional around attr_protected, a scope vs a class method, and the updated migration generator code. The rest of the diff is a much more detailed test suite. So I'm not quite sure what you concern is about calling the beta production ready, if you consider 0.4.4 production ready.

@sferik
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@sferik sferik commented on 2219362 Apr 2, 2013

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I didn't merge #49 until after I had already released 0.4.4, which was my top priority. After I released 0.4.4, I noticed that your pull request was no longer a work-in-progress, so I merged it into master.

I'll open a new issue to discuss future versioning plans. I'd argue it should be either 1.0.0 or 4.0.0 (to bring the library in line with delayed_job and rails) but I'm open to releasing another patch (0.4.5) or minor (0.5.0) before making the big jump.

@albus522
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I didn't notice the order of operations. I am also in favor of version >= 1.0. Let me know where you want to continue that discussion.

@sferik
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@sferik sferik commented on 2219362 Apr 2, 2013

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@albus522 Let’s continue the discussion here: #50.

Please sign in to comment.