Use dotenv 1.0.

[JuanitoFatas]

Hello!

I want to upgrade my dotenv-rails but it depends on dotenv 1.0.1.

And foreman dpeneds on 0.11.1.

So should we bump dotenv version?

Here is the dotenv changelog: https://github.com/bkeepers/dotenv/blob/master/Changelog.md

Thank you.

[dlackty]

dotenv 1.0 shipped with some good features. Would be great if we could use it with foreman! 👍

[ddollar]

Could you please make the dependency a bit tighter? Perhaps ~> 1.0.1

[JuanitoFatas]

@ddollar Updated. 😀

[KevinBongart]

Yes please! 👍

[ddollar]

So there are two concerns here that I would like to separate:

• Maintaining dependency compatibility with Rails
• New features of dotenv

The former is not something that foreman is going to consider. As mentioned in the project's README foreman should not be installed in an individual app's Gemfile. I don't want to keep doing an upgrade dance to keep Foreman compatible with Rails.

For the latter concern what are the new features of dotenv 1.0 that we would be gaining by upgrading?

[JuanitoFatas]

Hi @ddollar. I understand your concerns. Thank you for prompt reply.

For dotenv 1.0, it fixes a deprecation warnings when using Ruby 2.1 and 2.2. If you are running on Ruby 2.1 or 2.2 with -w option enabled. There is a deprecation warning for File.exists?. And fix a substitution bug when variable is single quoted.

And other improvements for Rails, though.

[allaire]

Let's do this :)

[ddollar]

I have thought long and hard about this and I'm going to be removing dotenv from foreman to get off this upgrade treadmill. For now you should install foreman using gem install foreman at the system level rather than putting it into your Gemfiles. Ruby's one-version-per-library policy makes this untenable.

[JuanitoFatas]

I removed foreman from all my apps and install in my system 😉 . Thank you @ddollar, 👍 !