-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 251
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 History and README Supported platforms. #205
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A few things I think should be addressed before merge, but on the general whole, very nice @junaruga! 👍
History.md
Outdated
|
||
* Minor enhancements | ||
* Add a required_ruby_version of >= 2.2.2, that is same condition | ||
with rack 2.0.1. (Samuel Giddins #194) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
", similar to rack 2.0.1"
perhaps reads a bit simpler.
README.md
Outdated
* 2.2.2+ | ||
* 2.3 | ||
* 2.4 | ||
* JRuby 9000 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we can say JRuby 9.1.+, we don't actually test towards JRuby 9.0.
README.md
Outdated
* 2.4 | ||
* JRuby 9000 | ||
|
||
If you are using Ruby 1.8 or 1.9, use rack-test 0.6.3. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
"Ruby 1.8, 1.9 or JRuby 1.7, use..."
3df7129
to
b753db8
Compare
@perlun thanks for the review. Those makes sense for me. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks, looks really good now! You can go on and merge this, and publish the release.
ok! maybe tomorrow I will publish and release. |
@perlun @scepticulous release v0.7.1 done! |
@junaruga You changed your mind to make it 0.7.1 instead of 0.8.0, or was it just a mistake? The History.md file still says 0.8.0: https://github.com/rack-test/rack-test/blob/master/History.md#080--2017-11-19 I think 0.8.0 makes sense, since this release adds new functionality. |
@perlun |
v0.8.0 release done. First removed uploaded 0.7.1 gem and removed the tag, then installed v0.8.0.
|
No worries! We can all make a mistake. |
😆 That's life, don't take it so hard. |
Updated for 0.8.0
Added supported platforms
From rack-test 0.7.0 breaks Ruby 1.8.7 compatibility #193 (comment)
Inspired from https://github.com/socketry/nio4r/blob/master/README.md#supported-platforms
What do you think?