[DO NOT REVIEW] Add wheel platform support to RubyGems #8891
+4,542
−118
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
segiddins
force-pushed
the
segiddins/gem-platform
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d339a8e to
00ae57c
Compare
segiddins
force-pushed
the
segiddins/gem-platform
branch
3 times, most recently
from
1c1c67b to
2ae538d
Compare
Implements wheel-type platforms (whl-{ruby}-{abi}-{platform}) for binary gem support.
Key changes:
- Add Gem::Platform::Wheel class for wheel platform parsing and matching
- Add Gem::Platform::Specific class for structured environment representation
- Implement comprehensive wheel tag generation with platform compatibility
- Add Linux-specific platform detection (manylinux/musllinux) with ELF parsing
- Update platform matching logic to handle wheel vs traditional platform resolution
- Maintain full backwards compatibility with existing platform functionality
All tests pass with enhanced platform resolution supporting both traditional
and wheel platform formats for future binary gem distribution.
Add Bundler integration tests for wheel platform support
Add comprehensive tests to validate wheel platform gem building and
resolution in Bundler:
- Test wheel platform gem creation with correct platform naming
- Test fallback to ruby gems when wheel platforms don't match
- Test multi-tag wheel platform handling (currently skipped)
- Test platform resolution priority (currently skipped)
- Test lockfile wheel platform recording (currently skipped)
Most tests are currently skipped as they require Bundler resolver
updates to handle Gem::Platform::Wheel objects. The working test
demonstrates that wheel platform gems can be built successfully
with full platform names (e.g. wheel_native-1.0.0-whl-rb33-x86_64_linux.gem).
Add comprehensive tests to validate wheel platform gem building and resolution in Bundler: - Test wheel platform gem creation with correct platform naming - Test fallback to ruby gems when wheel platforms don't match - Test multi-tag wheel platform handling (currently skipped) - Test platform resolution priority (currently skipped) - Test lockfile wheel platform recording (currently skipped) Most tests are currently skipped as they require Bundler resolver updates to handle Gem::Platform::Wheel objects. The working test demonstrates that wheel platform gems can be built successfully with full platform names (e.g. wheel_native-1.0.0-whl-rb33-x86_64_linux.gem).
Changes wheel platform gems to require RubyGems 3.8.0.dev instead of 4.0.0, matching the current development version. This allows wheel platform gems to be properly resolved by the dependency resolver. Fixes all wheel platform resolver test failures.
segiddins
force-pushed
the
segiddins/gem-platform
branch
from
2ae538d to
0b3a172
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Implements wheel-type platforms (whl-{ruby}-{platform}) for binary gem support. Key changes:
See rubygems/rfcs#60 for the RFC
What was the end-user or developer problem that led to this PR?
What is your fix for the problem, implemented in this PR?
Make sure the following tasks are checked