Skip to content

correct extra files ref issue introduced in 0c80f9b #942

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Mar 5, 2025
Merged

correct extra files ref issue introduced in 0c80f9b #942

merged 5 commits into from
Mar 5, 2025

Conversation

NixM0nk3y
Copy link
Contributor

@NixM0nk3y NixM0nk3y commented Feb 25, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Description

Building windows installers using the latest version of constructor (3.11.1) has broken extra_files. Reverting to 3.11.0 solves the issues. This looks to have been introduced in 0c80f9b with the recent jinga changes and the casing of the extra_files var was changed.

Checklist - did you ...

  • [ x] Add a file to the news directory (using the template) for the next release's release notes?
  • Add / update necessary tests?
  • Add / update outdated documentation?

@NixM0nk3y NixM0nk3y requested a review from a team as a code owner February 25, 2025 17:44
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this to 🆕 New in 🔎 Review Feb 25, 2025
@conda-bot
Copy link
Contributor

We require contributors to sign our Contributor License Agreement and we don't have one on file for @NixM0nk3y.

In order for us to review and merge your code, please e-sign the Contributor License Agreement PDF. We then need to manually verify your signature, merge the PR (conda/infrastructure#1117), and ping the bot to refresh the PR.

@conda-bot conda-bot mentioned this pull request Feb 25, 2025
Merged
jaimergp
jaimergp reviewed Feb 28, 2025
View reviewed changes
@jaimergp
Copy link
Contributor

Hm, I wonder why the tests didn't catch that if that's indeed the bug 🤔 Let's see.

@NixM0nk3y
Copy link
Contributor Author

A quick scan over the testing , could be wrong but I dont see NSIS_SCRIPTS_RAISE_ERRORS being set anywhere ?

@marcoesters
Copy link
Contributor

A quick scan over the testing , could be wrong but I dont see NSIS_SCRIPTS_RAISE_ERRORS being set anywhere ?

I agree with that assessment. Can you add this to the environment in the test workflow? I will run the workflow afterwards. Thanks for catching that!

@marcoesters marcoesters mentioned this pull request Mar 3, 2025
Merged
3 tasks
@marcoesters
Copy link
Contributor

This looks good to me overall - once the CLA is signed and pushed through, I will approve and merge.

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from 🆕 New to ✅ Approved in 🔎 Review Mar 5, 2025
@conda-bot conda-bot added the cla-signed [bot] added once the contributor has signed the CLA label Mar 5, 2025
@jaimergp jaimergp merged commit e93cd13 into conda:main Mar 5, 2025
16 checks passed
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from ✅ Approved to 🏁 Done in 🔎 Review Mar 5, 2025
@marcoesters marcoesters mentioned this pull request Sep 18, 2025
Open
3 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jaimergp jaimergp jaimergp approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
cla-signed [bot] added once the contributor has signed the CLA
Projects
🔎 Review
Archived in project
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@NixM0nk3y @conda-bot @jaimergp @marcoesters