Ruby 1.9 Dropped in Patch Level Version

[tf]

Hi,

while I understand that Ruby 1.9 has reached EOL, I just wanted to point out that dropping a ruby version in a version bump from 4.2.2 to 4.2.3 makes it quite hard for gem authors like me to keep dependencies on paperclip sane. So if my gem should still support Ruby 1.9, I'll have to depend on = 4.2.2 now? Then I have to release a new gem version myself and users of my gem will see errors during bundle until they update. I really would have preferred if the version scheme had been a little bit more semantic.

That said, I really enjoy using Paperclip. Thanks for all the awesome work you do! 👍

[tute]

This is true, I didn't take into consideration the fact that it's a quite-backwards-incompatible change. Do you think we should roll it back, @jyurek, and do it in a minor (or even major) release?

[jyurek]

Yeah I guess we should roll it back and say that 1.9 can use the 4.2.x branch, and then release 4.2.4.

[tf]

While that would surely make things a bit more expressive, it would still force patch level updates on depending gems which cannot drop 1.9 support just now. We currently depend on ~> 4.2 which still would have to be changed to = 4.2.4 (or ~> 4.2.4 if we still expect bug fixes to be backported to the 4.2 series).

Was there a special reasoning behind dropping Ruby 1.9 before 4.3? Otherwise, you could also consider to deprecate it/remove it from travis/stop accepting PRs targeting 1.9 and raise the version requirement when 5.0 comes around. At least that would be the most graceful path for downstream gems.

[tute]

Fixed in referenced commit.

[tute]

Released 4.2.4. Thanks for reporting, @tf!

[tf]

👍