Disable Gemspec/DevelopmentDependencies cop [CPGM-595]#57
Open
Disable Gemspec/DevelopmentDependencies cop [CPGM-595]#57
Gemspec/DevelopmentDependencies cop [CPGM-595]#57Conversation
erikkessler1
reviewed
Feb 2, 2024
| - 'github' | ||
| - 'gist' | ||
|
|
||
| Gemspec/DevelopmentDependencies: |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we use EnforcedStyle: gemspec so we can enforce the pattern we use?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@erikkessler1 I'm ok with that, unless we happen to have some gems that use Gemfile and then we're causing the opposite problem.
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Even then, it seems like forcing them to use our convention of using the gemspec is what we want, right?
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
A recent version of rubocop added a default cop that forces gems to place their development dependencies in
Gemfileinstead of<gem_name>.gemspec: rubocop/rubocop#11469Here are the discussions I could find about the two ways of defining gem dev dependencies:
add_development_dependencyruby/rubygems#1104My conclusion is that we should disable this cop.
This is for the following reasons:
appraisalgem, used to test a gem against different versions of its dependenciesMy opinion on this isn't strong though, so if anyone disagrees feel free to make a case for keeping it and I'll probably close this PR.
Note: originally ran into this in https://github.com/salsify/http-runner/pull/13
prime: @salsify/pim-core-backend
CC: @salsify/network-core