-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
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
Backport #3913 to V2.11 #4174
Backport #3913 to V2.11 #4174
Conversation
I'm not totally convinced about changing this dependency on a patch-level release. Are we sure using |
@kennyadsl if it helps, I can test it briefly on a real project (specs there were already green, but I'm unsure how much Paperclip is actually tested VS mocked there) unless your issue is with the major version requirements jump (from In regards to breaking changes with the last version of Paperclip at |
We discussed this internally, and we agreed that the best option would be to have a kt-paperclip release with the fix also for paperclip 4.x so we don't have to break semver for Solidus 2.11 by incorporating breaking changes from external dependecies. I've just opened an issue in order to verify if this is feasible. |
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 this is a good thing, even in a patch level
Recently, kt-paperclip 4.4.0 was released, so we can safely switch to the maintained kt-paperclip fork while keeping the gem on the same major version.
8dd1758
to
f4739c9
Compare
I'm happy to announce that kt-paperclip maintainers have released 4.x and 5.x versions, so we can now avoid bumping to a major version with this PR 🎉 |
Description
This PR backports #3913 to Solidus 2.11.
In order to avoid tedious warnings on Ruby 2.7 and greater, we need to switch to the maintained fork of paperclip on 2.11 as well. The deprecation is now fixed in kt-paperclip 6.4.x.
Checklist: