Thanks for the quick action, @olleolleolle!

I wonder why this is needed 🤔 From the Bundler Slack earlier this year

Maybe the extra file is needed for uses without Bundler?

This is similar to rack/rack-session#8

@dentarg Appreciate the sleuthing, the consuming gem had it a bit wrong the whole time. Them requiring rack/protection would be the fix.

But, then again, we could be nice to the world at large, not forcing change upon them.

@dentarg not all dependencies are auto-loaded through the Gemfile; a gem that uses rack-protection will have to use require "rack-protection" or require "rack/protection" or require "rack_protection".

This is similar to rack/rack-session#8

Yes, but it's different in the sense that there was a rack-protection.rb file already.

Thanks @olleolleolle. It looks like the test failures are due to breaking changes in Haml 6. I wonder if we should lock that to version 5 in our sinatra-contrib dev dependencies for now? I'm not exactly sure to do with that one. Haml::Buffer was removed.