.rbenv-version, .ruby-version, .rvmrc

[jandudulski]

Should we add them to the .gitignore, or keep one in repo? To be honest, I'm confused what's the best way, and which path we want to follow.

@teamon @sheerun @Ostrzy @szajbus @chytreg

[szajbus]

Let's discuss.

Arguments for keeping it in the repo:

• there's no default way to freeze ruby version for a project (like it is with gems)
• if default ruby version changes, this would force devs to upgrade
• allows to work on upgrade to newer ruby version in separate branch and have main branch working on older version of ruby

Arguments against:

• too many redundant files (.rbenv-version, .ruby-version, .rvmrc), need to keep them in sync!
• need to notify other devs about ruby version upgrade

[jandudulski]

Alternative is to add ruby version in Gemfile and leave to dev preferences which ruby version manager to use.

[chytreg]

There is another problem rbenv via rvmrc. Do we want to force of using one of ruby manager? I'm to lazy when use rbenv to keep update the rvmrc file which I'm not using.

Gemfile alternative is ok, but this is not the case. We should have the information e.g. in README file wich ruby we use for the project and that's all.

[sheerun]

Don't include any of these files. Add ruby version to Gemfile.

[jandudulski]

That's Adam way - do not argue. Just command.

:heart: :heart: :heart:

[szajbus]

Damn. I didn't know that you can specify this dependency in Gemfile!

Then do it, and .gitignore these files.

Michał Szajbe

On Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Dariusz Gertych wrote:

There is another problem rbenv via rvmrc. Do we want to force of using one of ruby manager? I'm to lazy when use rbenv to keep update the rvmrc file which I'm not using.
Gemfile alternative is ok, but this is not the case. We should have the information e.g. in README file wich ruby we use for the project and that's all.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub (https://github.com/monterail/guidelines/issues/111#issuecomment-15115956).

[sheerun]

If you want reason, .ruby-version and others force specific patch version.

[sheerun]

https://github.com/carlhuda/bundler/pull/2228

[teamon]

Do NOT specify ruby version in gemfile (I want to run 1.9 apps locally with 2.0 since it's much faster) Do NOT add .rvmrc, .ruby-version, .rbenv-version to git, put them in gitignore Specify ruby version in README

[bartoszrega]

@teamon :clap:

[szajbus]

@teamon kinda makes sense. But why not move the app to 2.0 in prod as well? ;]

[teamon]

Soon, but not yet.

Tymon Tobolski

On Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 11:06 AM, Michał Szajbe wrote:

@teamon (https://github.com/teamon) kinda makes sense. But why not move the app to 2.0 in prod as well? ;]

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub (https://github.com/monterail/guidelines/issues/111#issuecomment-15166745).

[sheerun]

Bundler 2.0 is going to allow for ruby '>= 1.9.3' in Gemfile.

[teamon]

Is going == is isn't now. And it would require gem bundler update everywhere since it's a breaking change...

Tymon Tobolski

On Wednesday, March 20, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Adam Stankiewicz wrote:

Bundler 2.0 is going to allow for ruby '>= 1.9.3' in Gemfile.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub (https://github.com/monterail/guidelines/issues/111#issuecomment-15167096).

[Ostrzy]

For now ruby version should be specified in README. If bundler 2.0 come out and it supports feature referenced by @sheerun, than we can just switch to that.

[teamon]

For new projects that runs on 2.0 put 2.0 in Gemfile. It will help for example circleci discovering required ruby version

[jandudulski]

:+1: