Skip to content
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

Upgrade to pandoc 2.0 #19

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 31, 2017
Merged

Upgrade to pandoc 2.0 #19

merged 2 commits into from
Oct 31, 2017

Conversation

dhimmel
Copy link
Contributor

@dhimmel dhimmel commented Oct 30, 2017

@conda-forge-linter
Copy link

Hi! This is the friendly automated conda-forge-linting service.

I just wanted to let you know that I linted all conda-recipes in your PR (recipe) and found it was in an excellent condition.

@dhimmel
Copy link
Contributor Author

dhimmel commented Oct 30, 2017

Note that there could be problems with pandoc-2.0-1-amd64.deb (see jgm/pandoc#4006). We should wait for that issue to be resolved before merging.

@jankatins
Copy link
Contributor

Sounds good, lets wait for the next release. Rest is lgtm!

@dhimmel
Copy link
Contributor Author

dhimmel commented Oct 30, 2017

Pandoc replaced the linux build with pandoc-2.0-2-amd64.deb to address the issue above. I changed the templated URL for linux to:

https://github.com/jgm/pandoc/releases/download/{{ version }}/pandoc-{{ version }}-2-amd64.deb

Note the incremented build number. So future PRs will likely have to decrease this back to 1. Should we template this to make it clear:

{% set deb_build_version = "1" %}

Perhaps this is overkill since the sha256 sums always need updating and are in the same section.

@dhimmel
Copy link
Contributor Author

dhimmel commented Oct 30, 2017

Will have to rebase this PR after #20 is merged which performed a conda smithy rerender to fix the failing builds here.

license: GPL-2.0
summary: 'Universal markup converter (repackaged binaries).'

extra:
recipe-maintainers:
- janschulz
- ocefpaf
- dhimmel
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+2

@ocefpaf
Copy link
Member

ocefpaf commented Oct 31, 2017

Will have to rebase this PR after #20 is merged which performed a conda smithy rerender to fix the failing builds here.

@dhimmel sorry for not reading this before. Next time you can use https://conda-forge.org/docs/webservice.html instead of opening a new PR.

@dhimmel dhimmel force-pushed the pandoc-2.0 branch 2 times, most recently from 10b729a to a4e0353 Compare October 31, 2017 14:27
@dhimmel
Copy link
Contributor Author

dhimmel commented Oct 31, 2017

Pandoc released v2.0.0.1 with some additional bug fixes compared to v2.0. Will it be problematic that the number of semantic versioning levels has changed? Should I switch the PR to v2.0.0.1?

@ocefpaf
Copy link
Member

ocefpaf commented Oct 31, 2017

Pandoc released v2.0.0.1 with some additional bug fixes compared to v2.0. Will it be problematic that the number of semantic versioning levels has changed?

Not really.

Should I switch the PR to v2.0.0.1?

Yes please 😬

Release notes at:
https://github.com/jgm/pandoc/releases/tag/2.0
http://pandoc.org/releases.html#pandoc-2.0-29-oct-2017

Use pandoc-2.0-3-amd64.deb for linux binary. See
jgm/pandoc#4006 (comment)

Generated SHA-256 checksums using:

> curl --silent --location $URL | sha256sum

Previousely, was not using --location, so checksums were not for
the file download but a redirect page.

Linux: data.tar.gz renamed data.tar.xz
@dhimmel
Copy link
Contributor Author

dhimmel commented Oct 31, 2017

CI builds are passing for v2.0.0.1

@ocefpaf ocefpaf merged commit b26b43b into conda-forge:master Oct 31, 2017
@dhimmel dhimmel deleted the pandoc-2.0 branch October 31, 2017 17:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants