Update scala versions #304
Conversation
|
|
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #304 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 49.29% 49.31% +0.02%
===========================================
Files 322 322
Lines 18523 18523
Branches 1055 1108 +53
===========================================
+ Hits 9131 9135 +4
+ Misses 9392 9388 -4
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
felixbr
force-pushed
the
update/scala-versions
branch
from
9cb6e48
to
93acfed
Compare
felixbr
changed the title
felixbr
force-pushed
the
update/scala-versions
branch
2 times, most recently
from
7df8658
to
35daad3
Compare
felixbr
force-pushed
the
update/scala-versions
branch
from
35daad3
to
2e558ef
Compare
|
The failing test seems to be the same flaky one as in the past |
|
The last commit is a bit off-topic but hopefully it fixes the flaky test which has been bugging me for a while now. |
|
|
||
| val defaultScalaSettings = Seq( | ||
| scalaVersion := _scalaVersion, | ||
| crossScalaVersions := _crossScalaVersions | ||
| ) | ||
| val defaultScala3EnabledSettings = Seq( | ||
| scalaVersion := _scalaVersion, | ||
| crossScalaVersions := _crossScalaVersions ++ Seq("3.0.2-RC1") | ||
| crossScalaVersions := _crossScalaVersions ++ Seq("3.1.3") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is a merge conflict because a PR was merged that changed this to 3.0.2 - building with 3.0.2 is better imho because classes will work with Scala 3.0.x and 3.1.x. If you compile with 3.1.3, then the classes will not work with Scala 3.0.x runtime.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are you sure about that? I thought binary compatibility was finally solved by the Tasty mechanism.
The libraries published to Maven also don't specify anything beyond "_3" as the version suffix.
If there is really still a problem I don't mind building with 3.0.x for the moment, though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Have a read of https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-3524 and its link
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok, I see. That's unfortunate.
I will rework/close my PRs as soon as I find the time.
| @@ -2,6 +2,6 @@ resolvers += Classpaths.sbtPluginReleases | |||
| resolvers += Resolver.sonatypeRepo("snapshots") | |||
|
|
|||
| addSbtPlugin("com.typesafe.sbt" % "sbt-site" % "1.4.1") | |||
| addSbtPlugin("org.scoverage" % "sbt-scoverage" % "1.9.1") | |||
| addSbtPlugin("org.scoverage" % "sbt-scoverage" % "1.9.3") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sbt-scoverage 2.0.0 is now out and upgrade seems to be smooth (from my experience with other projects)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I tried that first but ran into all sorts of problems, so I changed the PR to be more conservative. My main goal here is using a recent Scala 3 version.
I only update Scala 2.x versions until it became painful to go further (e.g. 2.12.16 and 2.13.8 both caused issues).
This is primarily to get away from the release candidate version of Scala 3. I also updated the other Scala versions for general maintenance.
edit: I missed PR #300 which already updates Scala 3 to a non-RC version, my apologies. I'll let you be the judge which PR to accept and will modify/rebase/close mine accordingly.
edit2: I wanted to add CI for Scala 3 as well but scoverage isn't quite there yet and some build adjustments are needed, so this will require a separate PR.
Cheers
~ Felix