New gem version about apitome

[jsmartt]

I just got access and would be glad to do a release. I'm trying to figure out what the new version should be though, and am open to suggestions/feedback from others here. There are lots of changes, but still no 1.0.0 release that we're breaking backwards compatibility with, so I'm thinking 0.2.0. Any objections?

[jsmartt]

It's been working well for me 👍

[obromios]

It would be great if you can release a new version of the gem. I think this is a really useful gem that produces great results, but I struggled with a number of problems which had already been resolved in commits that date after the last, 2015, rubygem release. I can see you are having issues debugging a new release, but perhaps in the meantime you change the documentation to suggest using the last solid commit of the gem e.g.

#Gemfile
gem 'apitome', git: 'https://github.com/jejacks0n/apitome.git', ref: 'xyz'

rather than just suggesting gem 'apitome' in the README.

Or at the very least please just add a comment to this issue stating the latest solid commit, so I know which one to use.

Another thing to consider is adding a CHANGELOG file that details the latest history of changes. This will allow users to deduce commit/version will suit them.

[obromios]

When I tried version 0.2.0 I saw the following error when I tried to start the rails server:

There was an error while trying to load the gem 'apitome'. (Bundler::GemRequireError)
Gem Load Error is: undefined method `assets' for #<Rails::Engine::Configuration:0x00007fce05232848>

I note that issue #32 also saw this problem. Prior to the upgrade I was using
gem 'apitome', git: 'https://github.com/jejacks0n/apitome.git', ref: '8fbf5aa'

[obromios]

I was missing

require 'sprockets/railtie'

Do you think you need to mention this in the README?

Anyway, it appears to be all working now, thank you.

[moku-io]

+1

[nahaylo]

it's been long time when since last gem was created.

0.1.0 - April 12, 2015 (3.62 MB)

[jejacks0n]

master works well? you've been using it and it's solid?

[nahaylo]

I've fixed the build status on homepage #86
@jsmartt could you review it and merge?

It looks like a build is failed so we need to fix it before creating a new gem

[nahaylo]

Also, my coworker try to fix the issue with failed tests on travis.
He made a changes to travis config and now it works fine, but tests still fail.

Please check this #87

[bf4]

@jejacks0n maybe generate a 'pre' release, so we can at least install from rubygems ?

[jsmartt]

I just released version 0.2.0 🎉

[jsmartt]

@obromios, can you provide some more context on your environment? What version of Ruby & Rails? Full stack-trace?

[obromios]

I have attached the stack trace. I am using rails 5.2.0 and ruby 2.4.4. Please let me know if you need any more information.

temp.txt

[nahaylo]

@obromios what kind of environment you use: production or development?

I've tried on development and it works fine

ruby-2.3.4
gem 'rails', '4.2.7.1'

[obromios]

It is occurring in development. Also note that I generated the app in api only mode, so there is no app/assets folder.

[jsmartt]

Even in API-only mode, you will need to have the necessary rails frameworks required to support this engine, which serves html and javascript content via templates. I too have an api-only app, and here's what I have included:

# config/application.rb

require 'rails'
# Pick the frameworks you want:
require 'active_model/railtie'
require 'active_job/railtie'
require 'active_record/railtie'
require 'action_controller/railtie'
require 'action_mailer/railtie'
require 'action_view/railtie'
# require 'action_cable/engine'
require 'sprockets/railtie'
# require 'rails/test_unit/railtie'

If you're not requiring a few of those, try including them 1 by 1 and see if it fixes your issue.

[jsmartt]

Glad to hear. I'd probably rather capture this in a separate issue that is searchable than putting this in the README. It's a slippery slope to put every issue like this in the README

[obromios]

That makes sense.

…

On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 9:22 AM Jared Smartt ***@***.***> wrote: Glad to hear. I'd probably rather capture this in a separate issue that is searchable than putting this in the README. It's a slippery slope to put every issue like this in the README — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#80 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABU2maFfPfzY11Aj1yF9b64QPIH7PBO3ks5uM4nNgaJpZM4M0MWB> .