Release 3.2.0 #678

rhenium · 2023-08-31T16:46:36Z

Changelog is written and version number is bumped. README is also updated while we're at it.

I want someone to review the content and also the language.

junaruga · 2023-08-31T18:33:11Z

Thank you for preparing the new release! Let me review the PR. However, as I am not confident for my ability to check if the English is written with the proper expressions. I also need someone's help for that.

junaruga · 2023-09-01T15:35:00Z

README.md

-OpenSSL provides SSL, TLS and general purpose cryptography. It wraps the
-OpenSSL library.
+OpenSSL for Ruby is sometimes referred to as "openssl" (in all lowercase) or
+"Ruby/OpenSSL" for disambiguation.


How about the following 1 sentence with bold fonts? I was inspired for the style from the following 2 Wikipedia pages. I may be wrong. But I suppose the quote may not be used in the formal English for this purpose to define the words unlike Japanese brackets "「」".　The quotes may give an impression people that the word is ironic or not truth such as air quotes. Anyone, please correct me if I am wrong.

OpenSSL for Ruby also called openssl in all lowercase or Ruby/OpenSSL for disambiguation, provides access to SSL/TLS and general-purpose cryptography based on the OpenSSL library.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motherboard

A motherboard (also called mainboard, main circuit board, MB, mboard, backplane board, base board, system board, mobo; or in Apple computers logic board) is the main printed circuit board (PCB)...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom

The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, commonly known as the United Kingdom (UK) or Britain,[k][14] is an island country in Northwestern Europe ...

I agree using bold font fits better for this purpose. I still want to use two separate sentences because I feel I have too many SSLs in it to my liking.

Sure. That's okay.

junaruga · 2023-09-01T16:47:29Z

README.md

+the standard library of Ruby. This is called a [default gem].
+
+Stable branches of OpenSSL for Ruby will receive security and bug fixes for the
+[lifecycle of their corresponding Ruby branch][Ruby Maintenance Branches].


This? Not sure.

We only accept the security and bug fixes for the [Ruby maintenance branches in the life cycle][Ruby Maintenance Branches] for the stable branches of OpenSSL for Ruby.

I am not sure if "Stable branches ... will receive ..." is a proper expression in English. The "accept" is better than "receive"?

I think "branch/release will receive fixes/updates" is often used in similar contexts. I took a hint from the linked ruby-lang.org page which contains "[b]ranch receives general bug fixes and security fixes".

However, I figure I could simplify it more to something like the below, and I now prefer this to my original sentence. What do you think?

Suggested change

[lifecycle of their corresponding Ruby branch][Ruby Maintenance Branches].

Each stable branch of OpenSSL for Ruby will remain supported as long as it is

included as a default gem in [supported Ruby branches][Ruby Maintenance Branches].

OK. It looks nice. By the way, I am not familiar with the "Suggested change" feature on GitHub. (And I want to utilize it :)) The suggested change above is for the current line 17, but maybe you want to change the current lines 16 and 17.

I wanted to do so, but I wasn't able to figure out how to change the lines. I think the original comment was attached to the line 17 only.

junaruga · 2023-09-01T16:51:28Z

README.md

+Stable branches of OpenSSL for Ruby will receive security and bug fixes for the
+[lifecycle of their corresponding Ruby branch][Ruby Maintenance Branches].
+
+|Branch|Maintenance status             |Ruby compatibility|OpenSSL compatibility                       |


I was not able to understand what the Branch column meant. Which repository's branch?

I meant the stable branches of OpenSSL for Ruby, mentioned above.

I see. I was confused. Because the actual stable (git) branch names are maint-X.Y, not X.Y written in the document. And there is also not maint-3.2 yet. If you use the X.Y for your intent, I feel that the column name is "Version of OpenSSL for Ruby" rather than "Branch".

That makes sense. However I wasn't able to fit "Version of OpenSSL for Ruby" or "OpenSSL for Ruby" without creating line-wrapping, so I just used "Version" instead. Do you think this is clear enough?

I see. Thanks for explaining the context. And yes, the "Version" is clear enough to me.

junaruga · 2023-09-01T17:00:19Z

README.md


 ```
 gem install openssl
 ```

-You may need to specify the path where OpenSSL is installed.
+In some cases, it may be necessary to specify the path to the installation
+directory of the OpenSSL library.


Perhaps like this? I feel that "installation (noun) directory (noun)" is not natural.

In some cases, you may need to specify the path to the directory where the OpenSSL library is installed.

I don't have the vocabulary to explain this, but I believe "a car engine" is grammatical English.

That said, I don't have a preference on this. I just wanted to make it crystal clear which "OpenSSL" it refers to.

I am not sure if my suggestion is correct or not. I think you can keep the current change.

I think both sentences are correct from the grammatical perspective. I didn't update this sentence, but I don't have an opinion either.

Sure, that's all right.

junaruga · 2023-09-01T17:30:16Z

All right. I also checked the 2nd commit - History.md Compatibility and Notable changes. The 2nd commit looks good to me so far. But I understand it is working in progress.

My review is all for now.

History.md

junaruga · 2023-09-18T14:01:29Z

Do you have any other things to do for this PR to release the new version in your mind?

* Reword the description in README for more clarity. * Add a compatibility matrix of our stable branches and explain the maintenance policy. * Remove the obsolete paragraph for how to use the gem in Ruby 2.3, which is no longer supported.

rhenium · 2023-09-21T18:32:49Z

No, I don't think we have any blocker.

rhenium · 2023-09-21T18:42:01Z

I slightly reworded History.md after re-reading it: https://github.com/ruby/openssl/compare/87c147a4400d54e9001d71c8ba520f031c5e16d4..6b3dd6a372c5eabc88bf35a312937ee3e1a6a105#diff-abfa5988643af1b8b2600aac13b273922dbb3372e021bf1d7caadfe7473c9561

I'll push the .gem to rubygems.org if it looks good.

junaruga · 2023-09-21T19:15:44Z

I slightly reworded History.md after re-reading it: https://github.com/ruby/openssl/compare/87c147a4400d54e9001d71c8ba520f031c5e16d4..6b3dd6a372c5eabc88bf35a312937ee3e1a6a105#diff-abfa5988643af1b8b2600aac13b273922dbb3372e021bf1d7caadfe7473c9561

I'll push the .gem to rubygems.org if it looks good.

Sure. Let me review it.

What does the link mean? I see not only the History.md, but also test.yml and *.rb files on the linked page.

junaruga · 2023-09-21T19:29:16Z

Sure. Let me review it.

What does the link mean? I see not only the History.md, but also test.yml and *.rb files on the linked page.

All right. the History.md part in the linked page is the change. I reviewed it and checked the History.md preview on my browser. And it looks good to me.

I'll push the .gem to rubygems.org if it looks good.

So, I think you can merge this PR. I didn't merge this PR by myself. I understand you want me to merge a PR when I see it looks good. But I am more careful for this kind of PR related to upgrading gem version.

Thanks!

junaruga

It looks good to me!

junaruga · 2023-09-21T19:33:30Z

I tested the gem's building and installation on my local.

$ cat /etc/fedora-release 
Fedora release 38 (Thirty Eight)

$ gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 13.2.1 20230728 (Red Hat 13.2.1-1)
Copyright (C) 2023 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

$ which ruby
~/.local/ruby-05a853c2f2-debug/bin/ruby

$ ruby -v
ruby 3.3.0dev (2023-09-11T15:25:06Z master 05a853c2f2) [x86_64-linux]

$ which gem
~/.local/ruby-05a853c2f2-debug/bin/gem

$ gem -v
3.5.0.dev

$ gem build openssl.gemspec 
  Successfully built RubyGem
  Name: openssl
  Version: 3.2.0
  File: openssl-3.2.0.gem

$ echo $?
0

$ ls -l openssl-3.2.0.gem 
-rw-r--r--. 1 jaruga jaruga 203264 Sep 21 21:29 openssl-3.2.0.gem

$ gem install -l openssl-3.2.0.gem --user
Building native extensions. This could take a while...
Successfully installed openssl-3.2.0
Ignoring debug-1.8.0 because its extensions are not built. Try: gem pristine debug --version 1.8.0
Ignoring rbs-3.2.1 because its extensions are not built. Try: gem pristine rbs --version 3.2.1
Parsing documentation for openssl-3.2.0
Installing ri documentation for openssl-3.2.0
Done installing documentation for openssl after 6 seconds
1 gem installed

$ echo $?
0

$ gem list | grep openssl
openssl (3.2.0, default: 3.1.0)

$ gem uninstall openssl
Gem openssl-3.1.0 cannot be uninstalled because it is a default gem
Successfully uninstalled openssl-3.2.0

$ gem list | grep openssl
openssl (default: 3.1.0)

rhenium · 2023-09-21T19:59:34Z

Thanks for the review!

rhenium · 2023-09-21T20:03:49Z

openssl-3.2.0.gem and openssl-3.2.0-java.gem have been pushed to rubygems.org.

junaruga reviewed Sep 1, 2023

View reviewed changes

History.md Show resolved Hide resolved

rhenium added 2 commits September 22, 2023 03:28

Update README and gemspec description

7691034

* Reword the description in README for more clarity. * Add a compatibility matrix of our stable branches and explain the maintenance policy. * Remove the obsolete paragraph for how to use the gem in Ruby 2.3, which is no longer supported.

Ruby/OpenSSL 3.2.0

6b3dd6a

rhenium force-pushed the ky/release-3.2.0 branch from 87c147a to 6b3dd6a Compare September 21, 2023 18:29

rhenium marked this pull request as ready for review September 21, 2023 18:33

rhenium requested a review from junaruga September 21, 2023 18:38

junaruga approved these changes Sep 21, 2023

View reviewed changes

rhenium merged commit 6b3dd6a into ruby:master Sep 21, 2023
43 checks passed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Release 3.2.0 #678

Release 3.2.0 #678

rhenium commented Aug 31, 2023

junaruga commented Aug 31, 2023

junaruga Sep 1, 2023 •

edited

Loading

rhenium Sep 2, 2023

junaruga Sep 2, 2023

junaruga Sep 1, 2023 •

edited

Loading

rhenium Sep 9, 2023 •

edited

Loading

junaruga Sep 9, 2023

rhenium Sep 9, 2023

junaruga Sep 1, 2023

rhenium Sep 2, 2023

junaruga Sep 2, 2023 •

edited

Loading

rhenium Sep 9, 2023

junaruga Sep 9, 2023

junaruga Sep 1, 2023 •

edited

Loading

rhenium Sep 2, 2023

junaruga Sep 2, 2023 •

edited

Loading

rhenium Sep 9, 2023

junaruga Sep 9, 2023

junaruga commented Sep 1, 2023

junaruga commented Sep 18, 2023

rhenium commented Sep 21, 2023

rhenium commented Sep 21, 2023

junaruga commented Sep 21, 2023

junaruga commented Sep 21, 2023

junaruga left a comment

junaruga commented Sep 21, 2023 •

edited

Loading

rhenium commented Sep 21, 2023

rhenium commented Sep 21, 2023

	[lifecycle of their corresponding Ruby branch][Ruby Maintenance Branches].
	Each stable branch of OpenSSL for Ruby will remain supported as long as it is
	included as a default gem in [supported Ruby branches][Ruby Maintenance Branches].

Release 3.2.0 #678

Release 3.2.0 #678

Conversation

rhenium commented Aug 31, 2023

junaruga commented Aug 31, 2023

junaruga Sep 1, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

junaruga Sep 1, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rhenium Sep 9, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

junaruga Sep 2, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

junaruga Sep 1, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

junaruga Sep 2, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

junaruga commented Sep 1, 2023

junaruga commented Sep 18, 2023

rhenium commented Sep 21, 2023

rhenium commented Sep 21, 2023

junaruga commented Sep 21, 2023

junaruga commented Sep 21, 2023

junaruga left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

junaruga commented Sep 21, 2023 • edited Loading

rhenium commented Sep 21, 2023

rhenium commented Sep 21, 2023

junaruga Sep 1, 2023 •

edited

Loading

junaruga Sep 1, 2023 •

edited

Loading

rhenium Sep 9, 2023 •

edited

Loading

junaruga Sep 2, 2023 •

edited

Loading

junaruga Sep 1, 2023 •

edited

Loading

junaruga Sep 2, 2023 •

edited

Loading

junaruga commented Sep 21, 2023 •

edited

Loading