New version of concurrent-ruby (1.1.10) broke the build

[depfu]

We've tested your project with an updated dependency and the build failed.

This version is either within the version range you specified or you haven't specified a version/range. To be able to test your project with the new version, we've taken the liberty of pinning the version for this branch and pull request.

name	version specification	new version
concurrent-ruby	~> 1.0	1.1.10

Unfortunately, we encountered failing tests after pinning. This means that this new version is not compatible with your project and the test failure will potentially also happen on fresh installs.

If you have correctly specified a semantic versioning version range, you should probably also file an issue with the upstream project as they might have released an update that's breaking SemVer rules, which is not cool. (But then again, not all projects explicitly follow SemVer)

We've left the pull request open for you to investigate this issue. Please don't merge it as is, because, again, we've pinned the version of concurrent-ruby for this test run.

What changed?

✳️ concurrent-ruby (~> 1.0 → 1.1.10) · Repo · Changelog

Release Notes

1.1.10

concurrent-ruby:

• (#951) Set the Ruby compatibility version at 2.2
• (#939, #933) The caller_runs fallback policy no longer blocks reads from the job queue by worker threads
• (#938, #761, #652) You can now explicitly prune_pool a thread pool (Sylvain Joyeux)
• (#937, #757, #670) We switched the Yahoo stock API for demos to Alpha Vantage (Gustavo Caso)
• (#932, #931) We changed how SafeTaskExecutor handles local jump errors (Aaron Jensen)
• (#927) You can use keyword arguments in your initialize when using Async (Matt Larraz)
• (#926, #639) We removed timeout from TimerTask because it wasn't sound, and now it's a no-op with a warning (Jacob Atzen)
• (#919) If you double-lock a re-entrant read-write lock, we promote to locked for writing (zp yuan)
• (#915) monotonic_time now accepts an optional unit parameter, as Ruby's clock_gettime (Jean Boussier)

Does any of this look wrong? Please let us know.

Commits

See the full diff on Github. The new version differs by more commits than we can show here.

---

Depfu will automatically keep this PR conflict-free, as long as you don't add any commits to this branch yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting with @depfu rebase.

All Depfu comment commands

@​depfu rebase

Rebases against your default branch and redoes this update

@​depfu recreate

Recreates this PR, overwriting any edits that you've made to it

@​depfu merge

Merges this PR once your tests are passing and conflicts are resolved

@​depfu close

Closes this PR and deletes the branch

@​depfu reopen

Restores the branch and reopens this PR (if it's closed)

@​depfu pause

Ignores all future updates for this dependency and closes this PR

@​depfu pause [minor|major]

Ignores all future minor/major updates for this dependency and closes this PR

@​depfu resume

Future versions of this dependency will create PRs again (leaves this PR as is)

[depfu]

Closed in favor of #665.