So now that we have some ruby plugins out in the wild that rely on this, there's a question of versioning.
right now we encode the ruby version in the docker images generated from this repository.
But maybe we should encode both the ruby version and the asset version?
Perhaps what we need is to docker tag names like:
<asset-version>-<ruby-version>-<platform>
or
<ruby-version>-<platform>-<asset-version>
we need the asset version because we build against latest platform base image and might run into a regression.
I can then find a way to have the plugin build automation select/override the asset version to use.
So now that we have some ruby plugins out in the wild that rely on this, there's a question of versioning.
right now we encode the ruby version in the docker images generated from this repository. But maybe we should encode both the ruby version and the asset version?
Perhaps what we need is to docker tag names like:
<asset-version>-<ruby-version>-<platform>
or<ruby-version>-<platform>-<asset-version>
we need the asset version because we build against latest platform base image and might run into a regression.
I can then find a way to have the plugin build automation select/override the asset version to use.