On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 01:50:46PM -0800, Aaron Patterson wrote: > On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 07:18:07PM +0000, Eric Wong wrote: > > Adam Duke wrote: > > > From: Adam Duke > > > Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 13:06:31 -0500 > > > Subject: [PATCH] limit rack version for ruby compatibility > > > > > > rack introduced a dependency on ruby 2.2.2 or greater in > > > https://github.com/rack/rack/commit/771d94e5dbe53058160a1f8a4cc56384c1d2a048 > > > > Cc-ing rack-devel + Aaron > > > > Yikes! ruby-core still supports Ruby 2.1 and possibly even 2.0.0 > > > > And there doesn't seem to be any documentation on why Ruby 2.2.x > > is needed in the first place for rack.git > > commit a2fe30a5e70371c89c1b29fdc2dc5f8027bc5fe6 > > > > http://bogomips.org/mirrors/rack.git/patch?id=a2fe30a5e70371c8 > > > > Aaron? > > The main reason I bumped it up to Ruby 2.2.x is because that will be the > minimum version of Ruby I'll be stuck with throughout Rack 2.x's > lifetime. IOW, I can't drop Ruby versions in anything but a major > release so I'm being conservative and only going with the latest (at the > time that was 2.2). > > I could be convinced to bring down the version number, but I'd like to > know why first. :) Oh, I forgot to mention that I don't mind eliminating the Ruby version requirement as long as we put something in the README that says we only guarantee it works on 2.2.x and up. Older versions could be "best effort". I'm just afraid to do something like that because I really don't want to maintain 1.8 and 1.9 baggage (for example). I used the gemspec to clearly announce the Ruby versions I actually test with. -- Aaron Patterson http://tenderlovemaking.com/