Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 13:04:17 +0200 From: Torsten Zuehlsdorff <info@toco-domains.de> To: Steve Wills <swills@FreeBSD.org> Cc: ruby@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Gitlab] Current Status of the port Message-ID: <55C88531.1070007@toco-domains.de> In-Reply-To: <20150806155233.GC11353@mouf.net> References: <20150804133657.GA52831@mouf.net> <55C0CAB5.9050003@toco-domains.de> <20150805000444.GA56001@mouf.net> <55C22577.6040802@toco-domains.de> <20150805152100.GA86368@mouf.net> <20150805163509.GB86368@mouf.net> <20150805171038.GC86368@mouf.net> <55C374B2.9030808@toco-domains.de> <20150806151608.GA11353@mouf.net> <55C37D2D.9050302@toco-domains.de> <20150806155233.GC11353@mouf.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, >>>>>>>> I will have a look at it. Is there anything in "Admin Area" -> "Logs" >>>>>>>> which could be helpful? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No, it looks to be a javascript issue, clicking the button doesn't even trigger >>>>>>> any sort of http request, it just does nothing. >>>>>> >>>>>> I think I may have figured out the issue. jquery 4.x isn't compatible with >>>>>> rails 4.1, it needs 4.2: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/rails/jquery-rails/blob/master/CHANGELOG.md >>>>>> >>>>>> So we need jqueyr 3.1.3 and friends. I'll have a look at changing that locally to test. >>>>> >>>>> Looks like cal-heatmap-rails upgrade from 0.0.1 to 3.5.1 was the real issue. >>>>> Tho I think we may want to consider dropping jquery-rails back to 3.1.3 just to >>>>> be safe and what I said about changing ~> to => in Gemfile still applies. >>>> >>>> Okay, i will create a port for the old jquery-rails. Currently there is >>>> a pending slave-port "rubygem-jquery-rails41" for GitLab. I could >>>> rewrite it to use 3.1.3. Or should i replace it with an explicit >>>> "rubygem-jquery*3*-rails41"? In this case we can omit the other one. >>> >>> Either way is fine. >> >> In this case i will create "rubygem-jquery*3*-rails41". This avoid an >> "unwanted" update to the actual version. > > Sounds good, you'll want to put a PORTSCOUT line in there too. In my "big patch with GitLab" there was already a port "rubygem-jquery-rails-railties41" which has the jquery-rails 3 dependency within. (But there is an error in its dependency definition) After some confusion about the package names, should this new port named "rubygem-jquery-rails-railties41" or "rubygem-jquery-rails-rails41". It seems that when ports defines a dependency to railties there name is suffixed with "-rails". I suffixed them with "-railties" because for my novice sense, this was not the same. ;) But to stay coherent i should use "-rails41" as suffix - am i right? Next question: what should i do with the number of slave ports? Should i create a PR with a big patch including GitLab? Or should i open PRs for the slave ports and GitLab itself? I saw that you committed many of the PRs. Thank you very much for your work! Greetings, Torsten
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?55C88531.1070007>