- Sponsor
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 152
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
Added Rails 8.0 to the test matrix #337
Conversation
@luizkowalski, thanks! I think you also need to update build strategy matrix. |
oh wow totally missed this! pushed it now |
hey 👋🏻 |
for some reason, I had to now add |
This look related to the failures on the Ruby 3.4 + Rails 6.1/7.0 build. Are you able to look into these?
It's a warning, but what do you think about resolving it to stay ahead? |
Did we need to drop Rails 6.0 support as a part of this PR or could that be done separately? |
It can be done separately but I figure that since we are already adding a new version here, we could save some time and do it here. I'm not strong about it though, if you want I can open a separate PR |
I readded 6.0 and added these dependencies on the Appraisal file, not on the gemspec, I think it is the right place since these are test-only dependencies |
Hey, @luizkowalski. I had other things on the plate today and just now getting back to this. Looking at this again, I think there's a couple of things here that I think we want to address. I think it was a mistake on our part to require Ruby >= 3.x and to continue to support Rails 6.0 since it supports Ruby >= 2.5.0 < 3.0.0. I'm inclined to go ahead and drop support for it. Rails 6.1 was also EOL'd end of last year, so we could drop support for it as well. That makes Rails 7.0.x the minimum supported version, which aligns with Rails' currently supported versions. We'll still need to add the missing dependencies, but could you make them specific to the Rails 7.0 gems instead of all Rails versions. You can wrap them in a conditional. |
@luizkowalski thanks for your work on this. 👍 |
Following up on #336, I think it's best to do on a separated branch