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

Improve RVM compatibility (so bundle install doesn't clobber the PATH to Vagrant in other terminals) and bump the Vagrant version to what 1.2.7 uses #2

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 31, 2013

Conversation

wizonesolutions
Copy link
Contributor

As in title and commit messages.

Works great!

I haven't changed the README because it works transparently with RVM. RVM will tell them that they need to install the right Ruby version if they don't have it, and then it will Just Work™.

yshahin added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 31, 2013
Improve RVM compatibility (so bundle install doesn't clobber the PATH to Vagrant in other terminals) and bump the Vagrant version to what 1.2.7 uses
@yshahin yshahin merged commit 4a0e5ca into Parallels:develop Aug 31, 2013
@yshahin
Copy link
Contributor

yshahin commented Aug 31, 2013

good point but you will be forcing people to download and build this version of ruby and every time we update that file it will cause all people to update and re download the gems.
I have removed it and pushed the change, if in the future if there issue cause of the version then will re add it to the project.
Thanks for the pull request

@wizonesolutions
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yeah, that makes sense. I tweeted you another comment which might be a reasonable alternative. Then they just need any 1.9.

@yshahin
Copy link
Contributor

yshahin commented Aug 31, 2013

If we can set it to use any 1.9.x ruby version then lets do that
But I think we should probably solve some of the more bigger issues for the project to be usable
I started adding issues for what is missing in the project

Engineer/Hacker/Problem Solver
Youssef Shahin

On Saturday, August 31, 2013 at 8:09 PM, Kevin Kaland wrote:

Yeah, that makes sense. I tweeted you another comment which might be a reasonable alternative. Then they just need any 1.9.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub (#2 (comment)).

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.

2 participants