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

Version 2.11.3 #208

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
May 8, 2024
Merged

Version 2.11.3 #208

merged 4 commits into from
May 8, 2024

Conversation

tdimitrov
Copy link
Contributor

@tdimitrov tdimitrov commented May 8, 2024

Bump the version of the crate to 2.11.3 and add Cargo.lock under version control.

.gitignore Outdated
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No, this is wrong scale-info is just a library and Cargo.lock doesn't matter.

Thus, revert this please

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I just had exactly the opposite conversation with @ascjones.

Bottom line - I'll revert Cargo.lock and keep the comment. Okay @ascjones ?

Copy link
Contributor

@jsdw jsdw May 8, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

TIL: Nowadays the argument is that there are pros and cons either way. (see https://blog.rust-lang.org/2023/08/29/committing-lockfiles.html)

Basically, the pros of keeping it are that one knows the precise deps the thing was tested against and can workout which dep updates may have broken something (if they do). The cons are that packages pulling in scale-info will ignore the lockfile, so you want to make sure not to be only testing what's in the lockfile in CI.

So, we can start committing the lockfile if we like, but in that case I'd prob suggest adding a step involving a cargo update to CI (maybe as a nightly thing) to make sure the latest versions of things work over time. Edit: Or maybe just having dependabot tryingto update the lockfile deps every now and then is enough?

@tdimitrov tdimitrov merged commit ede33c3 into master May 8, 2024
2 checks passed
@tdimitrov tdimitrov deleted the tsv-release-ver-2.11.3 branch May 8, 2024 10:36
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