Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
bump version
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
@rkh
rkh committed Mar 19, 2011
1 parent 0c9e3d8 commit 802b41c
Showing 1 changed file with 1 addition and 1 deletion.
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion lib/sinatra/base.rb
View file
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
require 'tilt'

module Sinatra
VERSION = '1.2.1'
VERSION = '1.3.0'

# The request object. See Rack::Request for more info:
# http://rack.rubyforge.org/doc/classes/Rack/Request.html
Expand Down

4 comments on commit 802b41c

@burningTyger
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

wouldn't it be better to put the 1.3 stuff into its own branch? After all 1.2 is still the default gem and people will come here for the docs instead of using rdoc server (at least that's what I would do). We're waiting for the new rack update to get 1.3 out, right? I'd keep master compatible with 1.8.6 as long as possible as people might just pull updates without actually knowing what's going on.

@rkh
Copy link
Member Author

@rkh rkh commented on 802b41c Mar 19, 2011

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You think so? We did the same for the 1.1 to 1.2 migration. I actually don't know of anyone running master on 1.8.6. Most other projects already dropped 1.8.6, like Rack, RubyGems and Rails, some of our optional dependencies do not work on 1.8.6, and I can't really blame their authors for that. Do to bugs in 1.8.6, I would not consider it a deployment option, either. The docs are pretty much the same, modulo the additions (like the patch verb), we cannot break and APIs, since we follow SemVer. Master is where the development is happening. Patches submitted by other contributors are always made against master, readme translations correspond to master. Having more than one active development branch means bidirectional cherry-picking. Also, since there aren't that many people using master, we would never gain any adoption running on a different branch.

From my understanding your main concern is not increasing the version number but rather dropping 1.8.6 support on master, is that correct?

@burningTyger
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actually I'm still on 1.8.6 on my Joyent shared accelerator but it looks like they want to get rid of us old customers anyway.
And yes, it's more the master branch issue. But I can't think of a better solution either.

@rkh
Copy link
Member Author

@rkh rkh commented on 802b41c Mar 19, 2011

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It is not that it is impossible to run on 1.8.6, but you will have to use backports and enable :reload_templates to avoid a memory leak. We just no longer support it. Are you running your apps on master? Why not switch to the 1.2.x branch?

Note that I did not merge in the logging branch, since that is where we are waiting for another Rack release.

Please sign in to comment.