Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix commits until walk #380

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 8, 2020
Merged

Fix commits until walk #380

merged 1 commit into from
Jun 8, 2020

Conversation

renatolond
Copy link
Contributor

It seems rugged < 0.28 also accepts "Commits" objects, but starting 0.99
it will only accept SHAs for the walk. It seems to work for versions
before 0.28 as well.

It seems rugged < 0.28 also accepts "Commits" objects, but starting 0.99
it will only accept SHAs for the walk. It seems to work for versions
before 0.28 as well.
@renatolond renatolond requested a review from a team as a code owner May 13, 2020 13:46
@renatolond
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've tested this against 0.28, 0.99 and 1.0, not sure if it's worth to test more in the past?

@mknapik
Copy link
Contributor

mknapik commented May 14, 2020

It seems rugged is quite fragile in terms of compiling on various ruby/libgit2 versions so it's quite difficult to test all possibilities.
IMO supporting those versions would be good enough.
We could change required version in the gemspec. @prontolabs/core What do you think about requiring version '~> 0.28'?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants