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

Repository Outdated Compared to Rubygem #20

Open
cou929 opened this issue Jul 1, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Repository Outdated Compared to Rubygem #20

cou929 opened this issue Jul 1, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@cou929
Copy link

cou929 commented Jul 1, 2024

The code in this repository (raihan2006i/active_admin_paranoia) is outdated compared to the version on Rubygem. The repository here is up to 1.0.11, while Rubygem has advanced to 1.1.0. The code on Rubygem appears to be from the forked repository DocSpring/active_admin_paranoia.

Could you please update raihan2006i/active_admin_paranoia to the latest version (1.1.0)?

Background

We recently upgraded active_admin_paranoia from 1.0.11 to 1.1.0, encountering a breaking change that introduced destroy and archive actions (https://my.diffend.io/gems/active_admin_paranoia/1.0.11/1.0.12). Initially, I checked GitHub for updates, but found no relevant changes, leading to a time-consuming investigation. It would be helpful if the GitHub repository is kept up-to-date.

I also noticed issue #19, but believe it’s crucial for this repository to at least match version 1.1.0.

@raihan2006i
Copy link
Owner

@ndbroadbent, Since you are now a collaborator of this repo and Rubygem, could you please sync this repo with your repo?

Also, can you please use this repo as the primary source for any future changes and publish new versions from this repo on Rubygem? While publishing new versions, make sure to tag them as well. Thanks again for your contribution and keep this repo alive 👍

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants