-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Support updating non-master
Julia branches (such as backports-release-1.9
)
#83
Conversation
.github/workflows/BumpStdlibs.yml
Outdated
BUMPSTDLIBS_TARGET_BRANCH: | ||
description: 'Target branch (in the JuliaLang/julia) to target. Examples include master, release-1.9, etc.' | ||
required: true | ||
default: 'master' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think this will also need a source branch, given that both will be on release-1.9
etc. ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
But one could be on backports-release-1.9
etc so can't use the same
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hmmmm. Presumably both the source and target should be backports-release-1.9
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't think so. backport- is internal staging for a repo, another shouldn't link to it, I believe
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure I follow.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So for instance for a bump request, Pkg branch could be release-1.9 and julia branch be backports-release-1.9
They will often not match when managing release branches
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh, I see what you're getting at.
This branch name is only for the branch in upstream Julia.
The BumpStdlibs.jl package never takes in any input for the branch name in the stdlib repo. We always respect the stdlib branch specified as e.g. PKG_BRANCH
in Pkg.version
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
E.g. we would parse https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/blob/backports-release-1.8/stdlib/Pkg.version and then use the release-1.8
branch of the Pkg.jl repo, because that's the value of PKG_BRANCH
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
So the user first needs to make a PR to e.g. edit the PKG_BRANCH
variable in the Pkg.version
file.
This can be done entirely from the GitHub web interface; if you only edit the PKG_BRANCH
line (and you don't actually change the commit hash), you don't need to change any checksums.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok. That seems reasonable
master
Julia branches (such as release-1.9
)master
Julia branches (such as backports-release-1.9
)
1ec9d48
to
4a4ee53
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #83 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 91.11% 91.68% +0.57%
==========================================
Files 11 11
Lines 405 397 -8
==========================================
- Hits 369 364 -5
+ Misses 36 33 -3
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. |
f41038f
to
c209f9d
Compare
I think this is good to go now. @IanButterworth Would you mind doing another review? |
Here's an example of the PR that needs to be made manually: JuliaLang/julia#48105 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
Fixes #76