[katello-devel] Easier Ruby multi-version support with Backports?

Mike Orazi morazi at redhat.com
Fri Nov 2 10:46:46 UTC 2012


On 11/02/2012 06:20 AM, Ivan Nečas wrote:
> On 11/02/2012 11:04 AM, Dmitri Dolguikh wrote:
>> On 02/11/12 09:52 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
>>> On 11/02/2012 07:56 AM, Ivan Nečas wrote:
>>>> In Ruby 1..9.3 various new methods were introduced.
>>>
>>> And we could not live without them? Which ones we need so desperately?
>>>
>> This might come handy. But we can probably live without it too, esp.
>> considering that RHEL6 doesn't have that long to live. It is also
>> worth noting that the bulk of incompatibility issues is language
>> differences between 1.8 and 1.9, such as mandatory block parameters,
>> lixally-scoped block variables (although I haven't run into issues
>> caused by that), plain different syntax, 1.9 handling of encodings.
> ACK, unless we have a dependency that expects 1.9, we probably don't
> need this. The language differences you mentioned are mostly backward
> compatible, that means if the code runs 1.9, it usually runs 1.8 as well
> (except things like {different: "hash notation"} of -> (x) { puts "this
> is lambda in 1.9" }, that are not supported in 1.8.
>
> -- Ivan
>>
>> -d
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> katello-devel mailing list
>> katello-devel at redhat.com
>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/katello-devel
>
>

For what it is worth, the aeolus experience is roughly in line with 
that.  1.8/1.9 didn't really cause much heartache (and I believe we used 
the backports gem while we transitioned).

iirc, we started hitting more issues and had to to start making harder 
decisions around newer versions of rails, in particular while trying to 
adopt the use of rails engines which are considerably better supported 
in 3.2 and beyond.

m




More information about the katello-devel mailing list