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

Update sbt to 1.3.3 #71

Closed

Conversation

scala-steward
Copy link
Contributor

Updates org.scala-sbt:sbt from 1.2.8 to 1.3.3.
Release Notes/Changelog

I'll automatically update this PR to resolve conflicts as long as you don't change it yourself.

If you'd like to skip this version, you can just close this PR. If you have any feedback, just mention me in the comments below.

Have a fantastic day writing Scala!

Ignore future updates

Add this to your .scala-steward.conf file to ignore future updates of this dependency:

updates.ignore = [ { groupId = "org.scala-sbt", artifactId = "sbt" } ]

labels: semver-minor

octonato
octonato previously approved these changes Oct 15, 2019
This was referenced Oct 15, 2019
@ignasi35
Copy link
Member

Hmmmm, this build needs some attention. I'll look into it:

[error] 	at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748)

[error] (Omnidoc / updatePlaydocClassifiers) java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: Cannot add dependency 'com.typesafe.play#cachecontrol_2.12;2.0.0-M2' to configuration 'default' of module com.typesafe.play#play-omnidoc$sources_playdoc;2.8.0-M5 because this configuration doesn't exist!

[error] Total time: 8 s, completed Oct 15, 2019 8:17:40 AM

@ignasi35
Copy link
Member

Trying to solve:

[error] (Omnidoc / updatePlaydocClassifiers) java.lang.IllegalArgumentException: 
  Cannot add dependency 'com.typesafe.play#cachecontrol_2.12;2.0.0-M2' to configuration
  'default' of module com.typesafe.play#play-omnidoc$sources_playdoc;2.8.0-M5 
  because this configuration doesn't exist!

I moved the adding of dependencies to inside the inConfig() clause:

diff --git a/project/OmnidocBuild.scala b/project/OmnidocBuild.scala
index 05fb46e..b4f0638 100644
--- a/project/OmnidocBuild.scala
+++ b/project/OmnidocBuild.scala
@@ -100,9 +100,9 @@ object OmnidocBuild {
 
   def omnidocSettings: Seq[Setting[_]] =
     projectSettings ++
-    dependencySettings ++
     releaseSettings ++
     inConfig(Omnidoc) {
+      dependencySettings ++
       updateSettings ++
       extractSettings ++
       compilerReporterSettings ++

Which seems to solve the issue (there no failure anymore), but I'm not sure of other side-effects or issues this change may have produced. I still need to investigate in more detail but I'm sharing early for extra eyes to see if this change is correct.

@ignasi35 ignasi35 dismissed octonato’s stale review October 15, 2019 12:24

I've introduced a few changes...

Copy link
Member

@dwijnand dwijnand left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Doesn't look like a safe change at all. dependencySettings contains a bunch of additions to libraryDependencies and ivyConfigurations += Omnidoc, neither of which makes sense as inConfig-scoped settings. So probably the reason this "fixes it" is (a) it puts the settings in scopes that are never accessed, (b) the effects those settings have aren't asserted in any way in PR validation.

Sadly this needs more attention. @eed3si9n, any ideas why this upgrade broke the build?

@eed3si9n
Copy link

It sounds similar to what I fixed in 2015 (sbt/sbt@3a3965b), but it's back? Are you trying to call updateClassifiers against artifact that was published using publishLocal? If so it might be better to switch to publishM2, which should emulate Maven environment better.

@marcospereira marcospereira mentioned this pull request Nov 27, 2019
@ignasi35
Copy link
Member

ignasi35 commented Dec 2, 2019

I forgot about this and as I come back to it I think it is a bit out of my (sbt) league.

@dwijnand
Copy link
Member

Duplicate of #110

@dwijnand dwijnand marked this as a duplicate of #110 Dec 19, 2019
@dwijnand dwijnand closed this Dec 19, 2019
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.

5 participants