Skip to content
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

Backport #1757 "Remove unknown hash keyword arguments" into 9.2 #1773

Conversation

jagthedrummer
Copy link

@jagthedrummer jagthedrummer commented Jan 2, 2025

Description

This cherry-picks #1757 into the 9.2 branch.

It also bumps the VERSION to 9.2.1.

Fixes #1769

Type of change

Please delete options that are not relevant.

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

Checklist:

  • Tests have been added for any changes to behaviour of the code
  • New and existing tests are passing locally and on CI - NOTE All tests for this repo seem to be failing as of last week.
  • bundle exec rubocop reports no offenses - NOTE in the release/9.2.0 branch bundle exec rubocop fails with Error: Property AutoCorrect of cop FactoryBot/CreateList is supposed to be a boolean and contextual is not.
  • RDoc comments have been updated
  • CHANGELOG.md has been updated

jagthedrummer and others added 4 commits January 2, 2025 15:56
* Pass hash through as explicit hash to avoid unknown keyword argument error.

* Changelog entry for cucumber#1757

Cherry-pick of a468bc6 into the 9.2.0 branch.
@jagthedrummer
Copy link
Author

I just realized that pointing this into release/v9.2.0 may not be the right thing to do if we need to end up with a release/v9.2.1 branch.

@luke-hill
Copy link
Contributor

Unfortunately the easier/easiest way of doing this is merging into main then cutting a version as we use a special tool to help us cut releases.

If there is enough demand here (+1's / rockets), I'll prioritise this. But for now I'm just going to continue working on the v10

@luke-hill
Copy link
Contributor

Item(s), for contention to be discussed in #1775

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants