From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS15169 209.85.128.0/17 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED,URIBL_BLOCKED shortcircuit=no autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.2 X-Original-To: unicorn-public@bogomips.org Received: from mail-pf0-f177.google.com (mail-pf0-f177.google.com [209.85.192.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 160EB2021D for ; Fri, 8 Jan 2016 23:19:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf0-f177.google.com with SMTP id e65so15969473pfe.0 for ; Fri, 08 Jan 2016 15:19:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tenderlovemaking-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=7xxVMsDA80TfxOXnRJKCJmhsM1pMO0vf2uf4+Uy6gSc=; b=sQ2tgx7ckh69YexoUBxk7TYh0Z6gZlea2Ow+Z/QxXrEg0WSkHUePxn+08ReO6PMTne LHVXcOGR3EFi90lVJMX967RdicQ4JoQsdRVsyJXsyQ5ljkIhbvbYDVmTzSsDKr34dpWN Mi9DSWtR80+/FsrfQ5ratBNYLdEy3RSkB41jaLcc+m2c+3If8TUbHYG7IVj7OfJf8Q1C 2dX/q+X/2ZggaI5fK2gMBoogh9EsS+hrqKEy/C9S1WdZ9gew65Igp4PTlMXTKB0icpq8 mdECDO/1W2CXAGMDzAPlrZXVI+XMhPItFbo7e+A4oRUqhiU3zBtj+YeJCDEMg92hhOM5 UbSg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition :in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=7xxVMsDA80TfxOXnRJKCJmhsM1pMO0vf2uf4+Uy6gSc=; b=LwfGnugQ7TGiEGy1gtZpB0llKASbTepm5d/ZSTyVy7P6opeH7DuQw9RiBgBFsVQ0xy on1ZmQc9jofMxH81h4FXc6dyV7F9LvzApcZLYnJUY5+VDmoy0BQ4kn5mJB3XGWd5DnqY 3v+JjZdG7fOViTV5dCYVIsK/bYTS82PfcpV1wlqHWUyRcZvGhGI7ExnpIQM5oCCJvmL6 eAz2YgYtL30I7vo2CfR6H1Sg9z/isC6g/AjTe2grjpczWgPF4nKFwZFHQwQfg9lX7y1F rzTo3TZiDsQvSMQctsnogHNzNUzgX1ukxpDjndXd+ZngYOeTIFk07zAXh5X6Y9U6H8db Y97A== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmCxps0Abgt58SCa7c/kW6JvgPpvTtXehdLlk0iqf0ABDk/PkPBBDFy0X10QxNYwrgfjVvx69r4XhY12nwtiLtsK0ahRw== X-Received: by 10.98.71.211 with SMTP id p80mr8016513pfi.135.1452295153531; Fri, 08 Jan 2016 15:19:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from TC.local (c-24-56-229-227.customer.broadstripe.net. [24.56.229.227]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id xr8sm169486016pab.26.2016.01.08.15.19.12 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 08 Jan 2016 15:19:12 -0800 (PST) Sender: Aaron Patterson Date: Fri, 8 Jan 2016 15:19:10 -0800 From: Aaron Patterson To: rack-devel@googlegroups.com Cc: Aaron Patterson , Adam Duke , unicorn-public@bogomips.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] limit rack version for ruby compatibility Message-ID: <20160108231910.GA42107@TC.local> References: <20160108191807.GA30703@dcvr.yhbt.net> <20160108215046.GA36373@TC.local> <20160108223732.GA28771@dcvr.yhbt.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="jRHKVT23PllUwdXP"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160108223732.GA28771@dcvr.yhbt.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) List-Id: --jRHKVT23PllUwdXP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Jan 08, 2016 at 10:37:32PM +0000, Eric Wong wrote: > Aaron Patterson wrote: > > 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). > >=20 > > I could be convinced to bring down the version number, but I'd like to > > know why first. :) >=20 > Because other people are _always_ slow to upgrade :) Yes, exactly. I am betting that by the time people upgrade to Rack 2.0, Ruby 2.2.2 will be old hat (Ruby 2.3 has been released already!) ;) > However, I suppose it's fine to bring the requirement up with a > major version bump of Rack. I don't want to burden you with > old cruft, either. >=20 > unicorn may also be able to drop the dependency on rack by > lazy loading: >=20 > * Rack::Utils::HTTP_STATUS_CODES is the main thing we use from > Rack at runtime; and unicorn would actually function fine if > the hash were empty; HTTP status lines would just be short > and non-descriptive. >=20 > * The Rack::Builder dependency can be optional, even. >=20 > Fwiw, I plan to support Rack 1.x and Ruby 1.9.3 under unicorn for a few > more years because of LTS distros. New versions take priority, of > course. Ok. Let me know if there's anything I can do to help. Removing the strict requirement from the gemspec *is* on the table, as long as we document the supported versions in the README. I don't plan on using anything that would be specific to Ruby 2.2.2 and up, but I don't want to be burdened by older ones either. A simple comment in the README would suffice. --=20 Aaron Patterson http://tenderlovemaking.com/ --jRHKVT23PllUwdXP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJWkEPuAAoJEJUxcLy0/6/GSAMH/213gBYMIZPgvLASlcdE7y/E UJUQ9mqJqISWgNyob2eAHTYg/rqlcPE+17lOovfdc7NR+WC26oQuHtgr5SheqZ3W +BUG6Oy+MfwqQyk5fREkWP3adZftGoGgqbggmCqTwF2Zg8BxIb8s36o5b9p3B+7L Hq0e8AH8YyCDsTT34dfYRNOy+UMb2ReY/QgeXbl2jMTdFQgCK7antjbU/bc2OEv0 /jd27IkIbOpW1/WW8U0GKF28zvmAv+5ZlC5fFyJ8v/H1o9p1HQtRQVKii4YyRWTy pAbwRE8F+HzlcGDwUrhqVPIcmQB5maVQ3HrlvJnG0eHotwwZ3tXYrXbYVoAO1vw= =OmvZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jRHKVT23PllUwdXP--