upgrades to grape 0.14.x; grape-entity 0.5.x

[LeFnord]

No description provided.

[dblock]

Thanks. Fix CI please (rubocop -a), squash commits.

[LeFnord]

please merge so that I can work on,

is it possible to cut off my fork and branch from this one, so that I can work on my fork
and make a PR to yours independent from my PRs of feature branches?
so travis don't need to run on every commit, thanks

the failed builds are rubinius, could not find a binary of it
and jruby, has problems with utf-8 chars, but this seems to be a standard java problem, not ruby

[dblock]

This is fine, however these classes will be declared globally, you might want to change it to a dynamic class, like Class.new(Grape::API) or namespace them with something closer to the spec name, like module ContentTypeSpec ....

[dblock]

This is great, lets try to finish it.

• We don't need to worry about Rubinius, replace rbx-2.2.10 with rbx-2 and add it to allow_failures.
• You do need to fix the JRuby build, the problematic file is most likely just missing a UTF-8 marker on top.
• Please update CHANGELOG and README.
• Squash your commits.
• Is this still compatible with grape-entity 0.4.x? What else is changing that needs to be in UPGRADING?

[LeFnord]

thanks for the response, I'll try to do it in the next hours …

to your questions:

• yes it is compatible with grape-entity 0.4.8 and 0.5.0, it was a requirement
• the README should be up-to-date, have to do some work on the CHANGELOG

a last question: can I change the version to something starting with 0.2.x, to indicate, breaking changes,
and create a tag for that (this is required from my firm, to use it)

[dblock]

Next version should be 0.11.0, you can update that. Don't worry about tagging, I'll cut a release once we have everything on green.

[dblock]

This is looking good. Should I merge this? Squash commits? Update CHANGELOG?

[LeFnord]

you can merge it, if you want 😄
the changelog is updated and I squashed some commits, sorry not all

for the next work, I want to merge this work into my fork (there it is master),
and make a regular PR, is it ok to do so?

next work should be:

• make params related stuff modular
• make adding of user defined stuff available → support for something like x-foo- …, first for the paths section, later for definition section

is it ok for you?

[dblock]

I merged this one.

I am down with a PR into master that looks like it could actually ship. The biggest concerns for me are UPGRADING, README and CHANGELOG, where people know what they are getting.

[LeFnord]

thanks for merging
no, I don't mean into into this master,
I mean, I want work on 'my' master and make regular PRs to the this swagger-2.0 branch

[dblock]

It's your master :)