Pin the major version of `google-protobuf` gem to 3

Without locking dependencies with Gemfile.lock, installing the labkit-ruby gem could pull in the wrong version of the google-protobuf gem that is not compatible with the current grpc gem.

See the more detailed description here - #40 (closed)

changed milestone to %17.7

added backend maintenancedependency typemaintenance labels

assigned to @vitallium

added 1 commit

• ed0dff23 - Pin the major version of `google-protobuf` gem to 3

Compare with previous version

	1 Message
📖	CHANGELOG missing: If you want to create a changelog entry for GitLab FOSS, add the Changelog trailer to the commit message you want to add to the changelog. If you want to create a changelog entry for GitLab EE, also add the EE: true trailer to your commit message. If this merge request doesn't need a CHANGELOG entry, feel free to ignore this message.

Reviewer roulette

Changes that require review have been detected! A merge request is normally reviewed by both a reviewer and a maintainer in its primary category and by a maintainer in all other categories.

To spread load more evenly across eligible reviewers, Danger has picked a candidate for each review slot. Feel free to override these selections if you think someone else would be better-suited or use the GitLab Review Workload Dashboard to find other available reviewers.

To read more on how to use the reviewer roulette, please take a look at the Engineering workflow and code review guidelines. Please consider assigning a reviewer or maintainer who is a domain expert in the area of the merge request.

Once you've decided who will review this merge request, mention them as you normally would! Danger does not automatically notify them for you.

Reviewer	Maintainer
No reviewer available	@andrewn (UTC+2, 1 hour ahead of @vitallium)

If needed, you can retry the 🔁 danger-review job that generated this comment.

Generated by 🚫 Danger

@andrewn can you please review this tiny MR? Thanks!

requested review from @andrewn

requested review from @reprazent

@reprazent would you mind reviewing this please?

approved this merge request

started a merge train

That makes sense to me, thanks @vitallium

merged

mentioned in commit a9eba187

mentioned in task #45 (closed)