Peter Solnica

> Would you be OK with a partial implementation, that depends on https://github.com/getsentry/sentry-ruby/pull/2403 before merging? @sl0thentr0py @solnic @frederikspang yes thank you, just open a PR and we can take it...

> I've adjusted rubocop. Awesome :) > It seems the failing specs are related to Rails 6.0.x release. I just scanned over the changelog for activesupport, and I see nothing...

@frederikspang thanks for addressing remaining issues - could you update your branch to latest master? Coverage should be OK after rebasing as we now merge coverage results from all test...

> can I merge this now @solnic? I merged it :) This PR made me think we could consider adding Rails HEAD to the test matrix - WDYT? Not necessarily...

@st0012 yes this makes sense, thanks for the insights!

> @solnic After looking at these, I think queue.process may actually replace `op: queue.sidekiq` instead of being a child span. > They will always be redundant > - But we...

> Latency is a bit difficult, without introducing some `timecop` kind of tool. Which we do have in sentry-ruby, so we could just introduce it here if we wanted to....

> @solnic The specs failing seems related to [sidekiq/sidekiq#6430](https://github.com/sidekiq/sidekiq/pull/6430) - Was able to reproduce locally, after clearing Lock file and bundle install again. > > Somewhat unrelated to this PR,...

@whatyouhide I ran it a bunch of times with `--repeat-until-failure 100` and it pointed to another one so I added a timeout there too. Unfortunately running all tests from this...

> > These were harder to figure out > > What do you mean? Can we catalogue them? Also, did you use `--repeat-until-failure` in CI or locally? CI tends to...