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

New alpha release downgraded my cucumber gem #625

Closed
jasnow opened this issue May 20, 2019 · 10 comments · Fixed by #626
Closed

New alpha release downgraded my cucumber gem #625

jasnow opened this issue May 20, 2019 · 10 comments · Fixed by #626
Labels

Comments

@jasnow
Copy link
Contributor

jasnow commented May 20, 2019

Tried your new 1.0.0.pre.alpha.3 release and it took my cucumber gem from
3.1.2 to 2.99.0. Appears one or more dependencies are holding it back.
Here is the diff of my Gemfile.lock file:

--- a/Gemfile.lock
+++ b/Gemfile.lock
@@ -6,37 +6,31 @@ PATH
 GEM
   remote: https://rubygems.org/
   specs:
-    aruba (0.14.9)
-      childprocess (>= 0.6.3, < 1.1.0)
-      contracts (~> 0.9)
-      cucumber (>= 1.3.19)
+    aruba (1.0.0.pre.alpha.3)
+      childprocess (~> 1.0)
+      contracts (~> 0.13)
+      cucumber (~> 2.4)
       ffi (~> 1.9)
-      rspec-expectations (>= 2.99)
+      rspec-expectations (~> 3.4)
       thor (~> 0.19)
-    backports (3.15.0)
     builder (3.2.3)
     childprocess (1.0.1)
       rake (< 13.0)
     contracts (0.16.0)
-    cucumber (3.1.2)
+    cucumber (2.99.0)
       builder (>= 2.1.2)
-      cucumber-core (~> 3.2.0)
-      cucumber-expressions (~> 6.0.1)
+      cucumber-core (~> 1.5.0)
       cucumber-wire (~> 0.0.1)
-      diff-lcs (~> 1.3)
-      gherkin (~> 5.1.0)
+      diff-lcs (>= 1.1.3)
+      gherkin (~> 4.0)
       multi_json (>= 1.7.5, < 2.0)
       multi_test (>= 0.1.2)
-    cucumber-core (3.2.1)
-      backports (>= 3.8.0)
-      cucumber-tag_expressions (~> 1.1.0)
-      gherkin (~> 5.0)
-    cucumber-expressions (6.0.1)
-    cucumber-tag_expressions (1.1.1)
+    cucumber-core (1.5.0)
+      gherkin (~> 4.0)
     cucumber-wire (0.0.1)
     diff-lcs (1.3)
     ffi (1.11.0)
-    gherkin (5.1.0)
+    gherkin (4.1.3)
     json (2.2.0)
     minitest (5.11.3)
     multi_json (1.13.1)
@@ -52,7 +46,7 @@ PLATFORMS
   ruby

 DEPENDENCIES
-  aruba
+  aruba (= 1.0.0.pre.alpha.3)
   bundler
   cucumber
   json
@mvz mvz added the bug label May 20, 2019
@mvz
Copy link
Contributor

mvz commented May 20, 2019

Thanks, @jasnow. I'll look into it.

@mvz mvz mentioned this issue May 20, 2019
1 task
@mvz mvz closed this as completed in #626 May 21, 2019
@mvz
Copy link
Contributor

mvz commented May 21, 2019

I'll release an alpha.4 soon.

@mvz
Copy link
Contributor

mvz commented May 22, 2019

@jasnow and released it is.

@jasnow
Copy link
Contributor Author

jasnow commented May 22, 2019

@mvz - Tried alpha4. Should I make another issue regarding contracts (now at 0.16.0), ffi (now at 1.11.1), and rspec-expectations (now at 3.8.3) dependency constraints?

@mvz
Copy link
Contributor

mvz commented May 22, 2019

@jasnow Those constraints are like that on purpose so they allow both older and newer versions.

@jasnow
Copy link
Contributor Author

jasnow commented May 22, 2019

Getting this error for rake on one of my repos after upgrading to alpha.4:

cannot load such file -- aruba/in_process (LoadError)

Run fine on current aruba gem release.

@mvz
Copy link
Contributor

mvz commented May 22, 2019

Hm .. that file is deprecated in the current release. Are you using the InProcess runner or just requiring that file somewhere?

@jasnow
Copy link
Contributor Author

jasnow commented May 22, 2019

"in_process" still works (no error or message) in gem release 0.14.9.

@mvz
Copy link
Contributor

mvz commented May 22, 2019

That means you're not actually using the InProcess class defined there. I indeed noticed that requiring that file in 0.14.9 won't print a deprecation message, whereas instantiating Aruba::InProcess will. It probably should complain when required, but for using the alpha.4 release, you can just remove the require.

To help me find out where we need to improve deprecation messaging, do you know why you added a require for this particular file?

@jasnow
Copy link
Contributor Author

jasnow commented May 22, 2019

Making a new issue starting with above comments to stop cluttering this issue.

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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants