Conversation
|
I like these PRs. Please see my comments on resque/resque#1920. 🙂 For this PR, we need to ensure backward compatibility. (I'm not sure why CI didn't run the test suite.) We could reflect on method arity (👎🏻) or parameter names (better, but verbose), or we could check for the existence of specific ENV vars (👎🏻 extra coupling), or we could check I'd prefer if Resque or Resque::Worker had a |
89171a3 to
d403b1b
Compare
|
Went for the simplest option here in just checking the number of params. Tested okay here on our staging setup. Tried both the updated resque from resque/resque#1919 and the version from master and both are happy. |
|
@mdkent I've fixed CI on Once the matching API in resque/resque#1920 is approved, I think we can go ahead an merge this. |
While also maintaining backwards compatibility. See resque/resque#1920.
d403b1b to
1646491
Compare
|
All set! |
This is the resque-pool side of resque/resque#1920. See the notes there.