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

Improve Bundler setup to support RVM aliases #52

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

gildegoma
Copy link
Contributor

Without this change, the Bundler setup fails when the rvm_rubies list contains valid RVM aliases, like
following examples:

  • ruby-1.9.3
  • ruby-2.0
  • 2.1
  • ruby
  • jruby

These aliases are quite useful to refer to the latest release of a specific Ruby branch.

Without this change, the Bundler installation introduced by rvm#40 and rvm#41
fails when the `rvm_rubies` list contains valid RVM aliases, like
following examples:

 - ruby-1.9.3 (→ ruby-1.9.3-p551)
 - ruby-2.0   (→ ruby-2.0.0-p643)
 - 2.1        (→ ruby-2.1.5)
 - ruby       (→ ruby-2.2.0)
 - jruby      (→ jruby-1.7.18)
 - etc.

Add more test coverage to `.travis.yml`.
The (docker) container-based is default for any new github repository,
and will be applied backward over time. It is thus safer to opt into the
(openvz) virtualized environment.

See http://blog.travis-ci.com/2015-03-31-docker-default-on-the-way/
@gildegoma
Copy link
Contributor Author

Just noticed that this PR will conflict with #48. No problem for me to integrate this change as well, or rebase if necessary.

@lpaulmp
Copy link
Member

lpaulmp commented Nov 30, 2016

@gildegoma Sorry for the late reply but are you thinking to rebase this PR

@pkuczynski
Copy link
Member

@gildegoma would you mind rebasing this PR?

@gildegoma
Copy link
Contributor Author

@pkuczynski Sure, I'll do. (Sorry to have missed the previous call, but I wasn't using this role for quite a while...).

@pkuczynski
Copy link
Member

No worries. Thanks for looking into it now :) Let me know when it's ready for the review...

@gildegoma
Copy link
Contributor Author

FYI: @pkuczynski I am waiting for #215 (which fixes the Travis CI setup, and extend the tests so it will be convenient to cover the change proposed here).

@pkuczynski
Copy link
Member

@gildegoma seems that this has conflicts. Can you solve them?

@thbar
Copy link
Contributor

thbar commented Mar 26, 2022

@pkuczynski this seems to conflict with #235, maybe we should prioritise review/merge of #235 so that the rest can be adapted?

@pkuczynski
Copy link
Member

#235 is merged... @gildegoma can you rebase?

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants