Ruby 3.2 compatibility fix is not yet released

[tomstuart]

935, which fixes a warning in Ruby 3.2, was merged in July but missed the most recent rugged release by two days.

Ruby 3.2 will come out later this month and it’d be great if there was a new version of rugged containing this fix so that people upgrading to Ruby 3.2 don’t get the warning.

Could we have a new release between now and Christmas, please?

[Vasfed]

ruby 3.2 is released and rugged install fails

[PikachuEXE]

@Vasfed Which version did you install and how did you install it? I install rugged 1.5.0.1 and it's fine If you install 1.0.1 due to pronto, the fix is in master and not released yet and thus I changed Gemfile to use github instead

[Vasfed]

@PikachuEXE you're correct, that was 1.0.1, had to switch both gems to use github

gem 'rugged', github: 'libgit2/rugged', submodules: true
gem 'pronto', '>= 0.11', github: 'prontolabs/pronto', require: false

[abinoam]

Hi @Vasfed and @PikachuEXE,

Pronto has a new release. https://github.com/prontolabs/pronto/issues/437#issuecomment-1368177742

[gytisgreitai]

are there any plans to release this to rubygems?

[tomstuart]

v1.5.1 was just released, but doesn’t include #935.

[Aiderlei]

@tomstuart what is the reason for this? Any updates so far?

I am getting quite a few warnings:

warning: undefining the allocator of T_DATA class Rugged::Repository
warning: undefining the allocator of T_DATA class Rugged::Index
warning: undefining the allocator of T_DATA class Rugged::Patch

[tomstuart]

No idea, sorry, just summarising what I learned from the commit history. Presumably #935 will be included in the next release, but there hasn’t been one since v1.5.1 in January.

[fnordfish]

935 Seems to be included in v1.6.2: https://my.diffend.io/gems/rugged/1.5.1/1.6.2

Weirdly enough there are no v1.6.0 and v1.6.1.

[tomstuart]

This was indeed fixed in v1.6.2.