Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Incompatible http dependency in logstash #206

Closed
moleksyuk opened this issue Oct 31, 2016 · 9 comments
Closed

Incompatible http dependency in logstash #206

moleksyuk opened this issue Oct 31, 2016 · 9 comments

Comments

@moleksyuk
Copy link

Hi @abonas

I'm developing one logstash plugin with dependency on your s.add_runtime_dependency 'kubeclient', '~> 2.1.0' but I can't install it to logstash 2.3.4 because logstash has http (0.9.9) and kubeclient depends strictly on spec.add_dependency 'http', '= 0.9.8'.

ERROR: Installation Aborted, message: Bundler could not find compatible versions for gem "http":
  In snapshot (Gemfile.lock):
    http (= 0.9.9)

  In Gemfile:
    logstash-filter-kubernetes_metadata (= 0.1.0) java depends on
      http (= 0.9.8) java

Do you plan to update it to newer version or specify not strict dependency?

@simon3z
Copy link
Collaborator

simon3z commented Nov 2, 2016

@moleksyuk would PR #204 solve this issue? Maybe not because @grosser is bumping to ~> 2.0.3. Can you come up with a common solution that we can evaulate? Thanks.

@grosser
Copy link
Contributor

grosser commented Nov 2, 2016

bump http in logstash to be ~> 2.0 instead ... it is unnecessary tighly locked

@grosser
Copy link
Contributor

grosser commented Nov 2, 2016

basically they are both doing a silly thing and now they collided :D

@simon3z
Copy link
Collaborator

simon3z commented Nov 2, 2016

@moleksyuk @grosser I am worried about this because bumping a dependency of one (or more 😊 ) major versions is not backward compatible (e.g. what if a current user of this gem has a dependency on http ~> 0.9?)

@grosser
Copy link
Contributor

grosser commented Nov 2, 2016

then they should bump ... "let us all stay on this old version together" is
not going to work either :D

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Federico Simoncelli <
notifications@github.com> wrote:

@moleksyuk https://github.com/moleksyuk @grosser
https://github.com/grosser I am worried about this because bumping a
dependency of one (or more 😊 ) major versions is not backward compatible
(e.g. what if a current user of this gem has a dependency on http ~> 0.9?)


You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#206 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAsZ0Agm-TmsMooiww0uibEsUxz92f8ks5q6RoXgaJpZM4KlBOj
.

@simon3z
Copy link
Collaborator

simon3z commented Nov 2, 2016

then they should bump ... "let us all stay on this old version together" is
not going to work either :D

Sure but just be aware that this will be scheduled with a major release of kubeclient as well (together with some other non-backward compatible cleanups and changes).

@grosser
Copy link
Contributor

grosser commented Nov 2, 2016

sounds like a good plan :)

On Wed, Nov 2, 2016 at 4:23 PM, Federico Simoncelli <
notifications@github.com> wrote:

then they should bump ... "let us all stay on this old version together" is
not going to work either :D

Sure but just be aware that this will be scheduled with a major release of
kubeclient as well (together with some other non-backward compatible
cleanups and changes).


You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#206 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAsZzITSxom3-kX3Rep6dMYBSwiU5KUks5q6Rt_gaJpZM4KlBOj
.

@simon3z
Copy link
Collaborator

simon3z commented Nov 14, 2016

@grosser @moleksyuk can you update the PR reflecting the decision we made here?

@cben
Copy link
Collaborator

cben commented Feb 5, 2018

I believe this is solved.

@cben cben closed this as completed Feb 5, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants