-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 902
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
Add support for Rails 5.1 #899
Conversation
This updates the code to work with Rails 5.1.0.alpha, as of commit rails/rails@1bdc395. The biggest change was to call the new methods provided by `ActiveRecord::Dirty` when needed. In the next version of Rails after 5.1, dirty will be "cleared" before after_save callbacks are run. This means that code in an after_save callback will behave the same as if it was run after calling `.save`. Since the concept of "changed" is fairly nebulous, two new method sets were introduced with names that specify whether they're operating on changes from what we think is in the database to what's in memory, or the changes that were just persisted. Paper trail will now use the latter set of methods if available and called from an after_ callback. There were a few other unrelated changes required to get this working on master. The first was the change from `appear_as_new_record` to `appear_as_unpersisted`. This was due to a single test that broke as a result of rails/rails@c546a2b where reifying a version with a nil has_one association was persisting the change to the foreign key. I am actually unsure how that commit caused the problem (or more specifically, I'm unsure how it was passing before). However, as best as I can tell, the purpose of `appear_as_new_record` was to attempt to prevent the callbacks in `AutosaveAssociation` (which is the module responsible for persisting foreign key changes earlier than most people want most of the time because backwards compatibility or the maintainer hates himself or something) from running. By also stubbing out `persisted?` we can actually prevent those. A more stable option might be to use `suppress` instead, similar to the other branch in `reify_has_one`. The remaining breakage was due to the `Song` model relying on internals that have changed from underneath it. From Rails 5 onwards there is a public API available to do what it wants, so we can just use that instead. This commit is not expected to pass on Rails 3, as paper-trail-gem#898 makes it sound like support might be dropped. If this needs to be ammended to support Rails 3, I will do so, but I will also grumble very loudly about it.
This PR resulted in rails/rails@ef993d3 and rails/rails@1bdc395 upstream so thanks for that! |
end | ||
|
||
def rails_51? | ||
ActiveRecord::VERSION::MAJOR >= 5 && ActiveRecord::VERSION::MINOR >= 1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This can also be written as ActiveRecord.version >= Gem::Version.new("5.1.0.alpha")
if we don't need to support Rails 3. Unsure which you'd prefer, so I opted for the non-allocating version since this seems like it's called from a semi-hotpath
I had removed the second argument since I made it optional upstream, but in Rails 5 it's still mandatory.
EOL software woo!
Please also update the |
I didn't add a new appraisal, as there is no released version of Rails 5.1 for it to use. |
Oh right, of course, and there's no |
CI looks to be in its expected state. ar3 failed (will fix if y'all decide not to drop support). Master with 2+ passes, fails with 1.9 |
Sean, we've dropped support for rails 3. Please rebase, thanks. |
Rebased, preserving authorship, and merged as #900 Thanks, Sean. To do:
|
Thanks, Jared. Sorry I didn't get to this today.
…On Sat, Dec 3, 2016, 5:44 PM Jared Beck ***@***.***> wrote:
Closed #899 <#899>.
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#899 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABdWK37DTuvIZJwuMosiRtg07Bmy2Iufks5rEfDXgaJpZM4LAhWC>
.
|
No worries. We really appreciate you going above and beyond your rails team duties on this one :) |
This updates the code to work with Rails 5.1.0.alpha, as of commit
rails/rails@1bdc395.
The biggest change was to call the new methods provided by
ActiveRecord::Dirty
when needed. In the next version of Rails after5.1, dirty will be "cleared" before after_save callbacks are run. This
means that code in an after_save callback will behave the same as if it
was run after calling
.save
.Since the concept of "changed" is fairly nebulous, two new method sets
were introduced with names that specify whether they're operating on
changes from what we think is in the database to what's in memory, or
the changes that were just persisted. Paper trail will now use the
latter set of methods if available and called from an after_ callback.
There were a few other unrelated changes required to get this working on
master. The first was the change from
appear_as_new_record
toappear_as_unpersisted
. This was due to a single test that broke as aresult of
rails/rails@c546a2b
where reifying a version with a nil has_one association was persisting the
change to the foreign key. I am actually unsure how that commit caused
the problem (or more specifically, I'm unsure how it was passing
before). However, as best as I can tell, the purpose of
appear_as_new_record
was to attempt to prevent the callbacks inAutosaveAssociation
(which is the module responsible for persistingforeign key changes earlier than most people want most of the time
because backwards compatibility or the maintainer hates himself or
something) from running. By also stubbing out
persisted?
we canactually prevent those. A more stable option might be to use
suppress
instead, similar to the other branch in
reify_has_one
.The remaining breakage was due to the
Song
model relying on internalsthat have changed from underneath it. From Rails 5 onwards there is a
public API available to do what it wants, so we can just use that
instead.
This commit is not expected to pass on Rails 3, as #898 makes it sound
like support might be dropped. If this needs to be ammended to support
Rails 3, I will do so, but I will also grumble very loudly about it.