Skip to content

Restore 1.9.3 and add 1.9.2 to .travis.yml #254

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

agrimm
Copy link

@agrimm agrimm commented Nov 5, 2015

1.9.3 was removed from .travis.yml in 0cbae14 but without an explanation for doing so.

Rubyzip is described as requiring 1.9.2 or greater, without any versions being described as unsupported, so 1.9.2 and 1.9.3 should be included in the versions tested.

The main reason I'm adding them to the testing matrix is that I'm investigating a problem with rb-roo/roo and Ruby 1.9.3, and I want to check whether roo or rubyzip is the problem.

@mnaberez
Copy link
Contributor

mnaberez commented Nov 5, 2015

@simonoff I work on a project that still uses 1.9.3 with RubyZip. We would appreciate if 1.9.3 compatibility is retained. If 1.9.3 support is to be dropped, please give notice and bump the major version.

@agrimm
Copy link
Author

agrimm commented Nov 5, 2015

Hmm ... all the CIs from 1.9.2 through to 2.2.0 failed to even build. I suspect it's not something specific to 1.9.2 or 1.9.3. Is it possible to re-run the builds?

@hainesr
Copy link
Member

hainesr commented Nov 5, 2015

I suspect support for ruby 1.9.x has been dropped because they are all out of extended maintenance support now. 1.9.2 ended on July 31, 2014, and 1.9.3 ended on February 23, 2015.

I do agree that the major version should have been bumped though, as per semantic versioning.

@simonoff
Copy link
Member

@agrimm I don't see any reasons to do it. This versions unsupported and was not stable. Only 2.x stable branch.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants