Update to allow use of Ruby 3.0 #106
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…er XML parser they have in their project
BiggerNoise
force-pushed
the
main
branch
3 times, most recently
from
7acd889 to
792640a
Compare
|
It's been ages since I made a P/R, so forgive any etiquette missteps. I'm going to resolve the remaining conversations b/c I think I have addressed the issues with the two commits I made today. Please let me know if there are any further changes you'd like to see. |
iHiD
reviewed
Jan 21, 2022
iHiD
reviewed
Jan 21, 2022
|
@BiggerNoise It's all great, thanks. One request on the git sha and one question about nokogiri, but then I'll get it merged and cut. |
…e use is not changed without our knowledge)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Addresses #105
I wasn't able to get the 3.0 syntax for the Publisher::publish() to work with ruby 2.6 although it does work with 2.7. I made my condition < 3 to ensure we didn't poke current users.
I had to include an XML parser for 3.0, happy to pull in a different one if you'd like.
I think there's a bigger P/R to change to named arguments throughout (instead of the options hash), but that's going to give you breaking changes. I'm happy to do the work, but let's open an issue so we can discuss logistics before I start throwing stuff over the wall.