Bidi brings older version of ring-core into projects; should it be :scope "provided"?
#182
Comments
|
For setting the scope to provided in leiningen, a profile is preferred (https://github.com/technomancy/leiningen/blob/master/doc/PROFILES.md#default-profiles mentions this briefly). I agree ring-core should be in |
timothypratley
added a commit
to timothypratley/bidi
that referenced
this issue
Jun 1, 2018
Including bidi as a dependency can break handlers that are expecting a higher version of ring-core: taoensso/sente#322 Resolves issue: juxt#182 Bidi brings older version of `ring-core` into projects; should it be :scope "provided"?
malcolmsparks
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jun 4, 2018
Including bidi as a dependency can break handlers that are expecting a higher version of ring-core: taoensso/sente#322 Resolves issue: #182 Bidi brings older version of `ring-core` into projects; should it be :scope "provided"?
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Including bidi as a dependency can break handlers that are expecting a higher version of
ring-core:taoensso/sente#322
Should the
ring-coredependency be :scope "provided" to avoid this?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: