Conflict with slop(~> 4.2) #1497

Closed
yuuki1224 opened this Issue Dec 10, 2015 · 9 comments

Projects

None yet

7 participants

@yuuki1224

I've encountered the conflict with slop when I run my small ruby script on my box. Error message is like below.

my/ruby/path/2.2.0/rubygems/specification.rb:1638:in `raise_if_conflicts': Unable to activate pry-0.10.3, because slop-4.2.0 conflicts with slop (~> 3.4) (Gem::LoadError)

In my script, I'm requiring slop and pry and these gems on my machine are pry ~> 0.10.3 and slop ~> 4.2.0. Probably, the problem is slop has breaking change when release version 4 (See here) and pry depends still on the slop version 3?
( I'm sorry if this issue is duplicated with already ones and feel free to close this in that case! )

@banister
Member

we should probably just fork off slop slop-pry so we can use it without interfering with other versions, what do you think? cc @strcmp @rf- @kyrylo

@r-obert
Member
r-obert commented Dec 10, 2015

yeah if we were to add Pry::Slop or Pry::OptionParser i think we could avoid this issue.

@rf-
Member
rf- commented Dec 10, 2015

Yeah we should really just do it already. There's no way we're going to keep up with future versions of Slop since what we have now works fine, so we should just vendor it to avoid putting people in versioning hell.

@r-obert
Member
r-obert commented Dec 10, 2015

cool, i think i done this before and it wasn't much work. i think Pry::OptionParser is a better name but without fully qualifying constant name maybe it would be confused with optparse and it wouldn't be obvious it is a clone of slop v3 although i guess when its in the pry repository its more likely than before that it will be changed and tailored to pry.

@kyrylo
Member
kyrylo commented Dec 11, 2015

+1 for vendoring.

@r-obert r-obert added the feature label Dec 11, 2015
@epitron
Member
epitron commented Dec 11, 2015

+1 for Pry::Slop

@r-obert
Member
r-obert commented Dec 11, 2015

"Slop" is not a good name to describe what is an ARGV parser but i think it is better to keep the name as well because i can't think of anything better than OptionParser, CommandSwitchParser, and ARGVParser. ARGV parser is not that accurate for pry, OptionParser has the issue i mentioned, and CommandSwitchParser is too long.

@r-obert r-obert referenced this issue Dec 11, 2015
Merged

fix #1497 #1498

@rf- rf- closed this in #1498 Dec 11, 2015
@epitron
Member
epitron commented Dec 11, 2015

๐Ÿ‘ ๐Ÿ‘ ๐Ÿ‘ ๐Ÿ‘

Pry 1.0, here we come!

@debbbbie

๐Ÿ‘

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