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

use latest faraday #77

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

aerickson
Copy link
Contributor

@aerickson aerickson commented Feb 20, 2020

test-kitchen is throwing ugly warnings. From inspecting my Gemfile.lock file I think it's due to my use of kitchen-puppet, that uses librarian-puppet, that uses forge-ruby, that uses faraday.

This issue has been fixed in Faraday 0.17.1 and on per lostisland/faraday#989 and lostisland/faraday#1009.

Looks like I'll need to keep fixing after this. Gemfile.lock snippet:

    librarian-puppet (3.0.0) 
      puppet_forge (~> 2.1)

test-kitchen error:

/Users/aerickson/git/ronin_puppet/vendor/ruby/2.7.0/gems/faraday-0.14.0/lib/faraday/options.rb:166: warning: Capturing the given block using Proc.new is deprecated; use `&block` instead
/Users/aerickson/git/ronin_puppet/vendor/ruby/2.7.0/gems/faraday-0.14.0/lib/faraday/options.rb:166: warning: Capturing the given block using Proc.new is deprecated; use `&block` instead
/Users/aerickson/git/ronin_puppet/vendor/ruby/2.7.0/gems/faraday-0.14.0/lib/faraday/options.rb:166: warning: Capturing the given block using Proc.new is deprecated; use `&block` instead
/Users/aerickson/git/ronin_puppet/vendor/ruby/2.7.0/gems/faraday-0.14.0/lib/faraday/options.rb:166: warning: Capturing the given block using Proc.new is deprecated; use `&block` instead
/Users/aerickson/git/ronin_puppet/vendor/ruby/2.7.0/gems/faraday-0.14.0/lib/faraday/options.rb:166: warning: Capturing the given block using Proc.new is deprecated; use `&block` instead

@aerickson aerickson requested a review from a team as a code owner February 20, 2020 00:45
@caseywilliams
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you very much @aerickson! Sorry this was tripping you up. I've opened #78 to just increase the upper bound to 0.18, allowing any 0.17.z version - I'm going to close this PR in favor of that one, but we'll get the dependency update released ASAP.

@caseywilliams
Copy link
Contributor

Ok, this has been released in 2.3.3 - please let us know if you continue to see issues!

@aerickson
Copy link
Contributor Author

@caseywilliams That fixed it. Thank you so much. :)

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