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

Rails 6.1 Active Storage's ImageProcessing transformer doesn't support :combine_options #925

Open
librod89 opened this issue Feb 22, 2021 · 4 comments

Comments

@librod89
Copy link

Steps to reproduce

Using Rails 6.1 and comfortable-mexican-sofa with comfy-blog, when I navigate to "Files", I get a console error saying:

ArgumentError (Active Storage's ImageProcessing transformer doesn't support :combine_options, as it always generates a single ImageMagick command.)

I can see a lot of use of combine_files within the code. Here is just one example.

Is there any possibility of updating this in the near future?

System configuration

Rails version: 6.1.3

CMS version: 2.0.19

Ruby version: 2.7.1p83

@donrestarone
Copy link

in case this is still an issue, I submitted a PR addressing it: #931

@librod89 in the meantime the fixed version can be used at https://github.com/restarone/comfortable-mexican-sofa
the master branch works 👍

@nitsujri
Copy link
Contributor

@donrestarone thanks for the PR! I don't think we should add the upgrade migration files for activestorage (5.2 => 6.1).

I'm not a maintainer, so I can only guess at what the proper way is. I imagine:

@donrestarone
Copy link

@nitsujri Thanks for the tip! It's my first time contributing.

Im assuming I have to make a change to the generator right?

@nitsujri
Copy link
Contributor

nitsujri commented Apr 17, 2021

@donrestarone actually based on your comment I realized the 00_create_active_storage_tables.active_storage.rb is not even loaded/"generated", only the 01_... file is.

So that means the 00 file is only for internal CMS development. At that point, your files might be valid (but renamed to something like 02_.. and 03_... It really depends on how multi-version development is managed (the travis.yml gives some insight).

I'm outside of my paygrade here so I can't give a recommendation, sorry.

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

3 participants