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

Lazily load uri #3005

Merged
1 commit merged into from Dec 2, 2019
Merged

Lazily load uri #3005

1 commit merged into from Dec 2, 2019

Conversation

deivid-rodriguez
Copy link
Member

@deivid-rodriguez deivid-rodriguez commented Dec 1, 2019

Description:

The uri library will be a default gem on ruby 2.7. Because of this, requiring uri at the top of this file will cause the default uri gem to be activated during bundler/setup, and that will result in gem activation conflicts.

So, it's better to lazily load uri here.

I'm using this patch in rubygems/bundler#7460 to get bundler specs passing against ruby 2.7.

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.

The `uri` library will be a default gem on ruby 2.7. Because of this,
requiring `uri` at the top of this file will cause the default `uri` gem
to be activated during `bundler/setup`, and that will result in gem
activation conflicts.

So, it's better to lazily load `uri` here.
@deivid-rodriguez
Copy link
Member Author

Merging this quickly to be able to move rubygems/bundler#7460 forward and get full ruby 2.7 support ready as soon as possible.

@bundlerbot merge

ghost pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 2, 2019
3005: Lazily load `uri` r=deivid-rodriguez a=deivid-rodriguez

# Description:

The `uri` library will be a default gem on ruby 2.7. Because of this, requiring `uri` at the top of this file will cause the default `uri` gem to be activated during `bundler/setup`, and that will result in gem activation conflicts.

So, it's better to lazily load `uri` here.

I'm using this patch in rubygems/bundler#7460 to get bundler specs passing against ruby 2.7.

# Tasks:

- [x] Describe the problem / feature
- [ ] Write tests
- [x] 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: David Rodríguez <deivid.rodriguez@riseup.net>
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Dec 2, 2019

Build succeeded

  • macos (2.4.x)
  • macos (2.5.x)
  • macos (2.6.x)
  • ruby_master
  • ubuntu (2.3.x, bundler)
  • ubuntu (2.3.x, rubygems)
  • ubuntu (2.4.x, bundler)
  • ubuntu (2.4.x, rubygems)
  • ubuntu (2.5.x, bundler)
  • ubuntu (2.5.x, rubygems)
  • ubuntu (2.6.x, bundler)
  • ubuntu (2.6.x, rubygems)
  • ubuntu_bundler_master (2.6.x)
  • ubuntu_lint
  • ubuntu_rvm (jruby-9.2.9.0)
  • ubuntu_rvm (ruby-head)
  • windows (2.4.x)
  • windows (2.5.x)
  • windows (2.6.x)

@ghost ghost merged commit a89b5ff into master Dec 2, 2019
@ghost ghost deleted the lazily_load_uri branch December 2, 2019 10:41
@hsbt
Copy link
Member

hsbt commented Dec 2, 2019

👍

@hsbt hsbt added this to the 3.1.0 milestone Dec 13, 2019
hsbt pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 13, 2019
3005: Lazily load `uri` r=deivid-rodriguez a=deivid-rodriguez

# Description:

The `uri` library will be a default gem on ruby 2.7. Because of this, requiring `uri` at the top of this file will cause the default `uri` gem to be activated during `bundler/setup`, and that will result in gem activation conflicts.

So, it's better to lazily load `uri` here.

I'm using this patch in rubygems/bundler#7460 to get bundler specs passing against ruby 2.7.

# Tasks:

- [x] Describe the problem / feature
- [ ] Write tests
- [x] 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: David Rodríguez <deivid.rodriguez@riseup.net>
This pull request was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants