crystal 0.26.0

[matiasgarciaisaia]

• Have you followed the guidelines for contributing?
• Have you checked that there aren't other open pull requests for the same formula update/change?
• Have you built your formula locally with brew install --build-from-source <formula>, where <formula> is the name of the formula you're submitting?
• Does your build pass brew audit --strict <formula> (after doing brew install <formula>)?

---

We've officially released 0.26.0 some hours ago, so here we are once again :)

Thanks, as always!

[DomT4]

Does this remain incompatible with llvm 6.0.1, out of interest?

[matiasgarciaisaia]

The builds are failing, waiting on amberframework/amber#922 (and a subsequent upgrade in its formula?)

I'm not sure if this is the place, but we should discuss how will Crystal and its ecosystem fit within Homebrew before hitting 1.0.

Is Homebrew OK with waiting until amber gets updated to have crystal 0.26.0? In that case, we may have a Crystal-maintained tap that gets releases as soon as they're out, and then let Homebrew work its times.

Making Crystal releases depend on the rest of the ecosystem doesn't feel that good.

Once we hit 1.0 everything should be fine - dependent formulae won't break upon minor releases, so there won't be major issues then. But in the meantime, I'm not sure about the best way to go.

[bcardiff]

@DomT4 AFAIK llvm 6 should be supported in this version. There has been some PR for its support, yet we don't have CI for it yet.

Maybe the llvm@5 can be relaxed.

[jkthorne]

@bcardiff I can install with the default "llvm" package from homebrew.

[felixbuenemann]

I've been running Crystal 0.25.1 with the patches from crystal-lang/crystal#6380 for some time with no problems, so I think changing the dependency from llvm@5 to llvm should be fine.

[DomT4]

(and a subsequent upgrade in its formula?)
Is Homebrew OK with waiting until amber gets updated to have crystal 0.26.0?

If there's no imminent release planned upstream there we could apply a short-term patch, if necessary, and bump the revision. A formal release with compatibility would be ideal, but if compatibility is there but simply not in a release yet and we can patch in that compatibility with patch do blobs, I can be okay with that short-term.

so I think changing the dependency from llvm@5 to llvm should be fine.

Sounds good!

[Willamin]

Making Crystal releases depend on the rest of the ecosystem doesn't feel that good.

Totally agreed. Not everyone uses Amber. In my opinion, if someone's project requires an old version of a language, they should be using a version manager to ensure compatibility. There is an asdf plugin for Crystal over at https://github.com/marciogm/asdf-crystal

[Willamin]

Is there any chance we could get a home-brew option for something like --latest to grab the latest released Crystal version regardless of the compatibility of other packages like Amber? There's already a --HEAD option, so it seems like there's a bit of a precedent set.

Or maybe that's not quite possible with the way homebrew formulae are written.

[felixbuenemann]

Well it would be possible to add a devel block and bump it as soon as a new release is tagged, you could then specify --devel to install it.

Another option would be to move things like amber into their own tap(s) until crystal hits 1.0.

[matiasgarciaisaia]

Just changed llvm@5 to llvm.

[DomT4]

@BrewTestBot test this please

[DomT4]

Merged in 3eb9fe9. Thank you for the contribution @matiasgarciaisaia, and thanks to everyone who helped out with review/discussion/etc.