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
Update the latest version of bundler #2863
Conversation
These test fails are caused by rubygems/bundler#7272 |
Hi @hsbt! I had a closer look at this, and rubygems/bundler#7274 won't fix it :( We fix it, we could merge #1868, which solves precisely the problem we're suffering from here. If we specify |
@deivid-rodriguez Thanks, I confirmed to resolve to activate issue of bundler version with #1868 |
9a37959
to
19ca0c3
Compare
@deivid-rodriguez Thanks! I did squash this branch, I will merge this after CI was finished. |
@bundlerbot r+ |
2863: Update the latest version of bundler r=hsbt a=hsbt # Description: Update to e1c5183 We need to this before merging #2857 ______________ # Tasks: - [ ] Describe the problem / feature - [ ] Write tests - [ ] Write code to solve the problem - [ ] Get code review from coworkers / friends I will abide by the [code of conduct](https://github.com/rubygems/rubygems/blob/master/CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md). Co-authored-by: Hiroshi SHIBATA <hsbt@ruby-lang.org>
Build succeeded |
7274: Fix more leaks to default copy of bundler r=hsbt a=deivid-rodriguez ### What was the end-user problem that led to this PR? The problem was that in some places, it was still possible to end up requiring files in a different copy of bundler (the default copy). I noticed this when I removed a rubygems monkeypatch from the test suite that was preventing the default copy of bundler from being activated when requiring files. This thing: https://github.com/bundler/bundler/blob/e1c518363641208429f397170354054b3d28effd/spec/support/hax.rb#L15-L20 ### What was your diagnosis of the problem? My diagnosis was that I should use relative requires wherever they were missing. ### What is your fix for the problem, implemented in this PR? My fix is to remove the rubygems hack, migrate the rest of the internal requires to be relative, and also introduce some hacks on our specs to make sure we never load the incorrect copy of bundler. I think this PR should fix the issues in rubygems/rubygems#2863. Co-authored-by: David Rodríguez <deivid.rodriguez@riseup.net>
7274: Fix more leaks to default copy of bundler r=hsbt a=deivid-rodriguez ### What was the end-user problem that led to this PR? The problem was that in some places, it was still possible to end up requiring files in a different copy of bundler (the default copy). I noticed this when I removed a rubygems monkeypatch from the test suite that was preventing the default copy of bundler from being activated when requiring files. This thing: https://github.com/bundler/bundler/blob/e1c518363641208429f397170354054b3d28effd/spec/support/hax.rb#L15-L20 ### What was your diagnosis of the problem? My diagnosis was that I should use relative requires wherever they were missing. ### What is your fix for the problem, implemented in this PR? My fix is to remove the rubygems hack, migrate the rest of the internal requires to be relative, and also introduce some hacks on our specs to make sure we never load the incorrect copy of bundler. I think this PR should fix the issues in #2863. Co-authored-by: David Rodríguez <deivid.rodriguez@riseup.net>
Description:
Update to e1c5183
We need to this before merging #2857
Tasks:
I will abide by the code of conduct.