Skip to content

Conversation

EliahKagan
Copy link
Member

This allows them to have patch version updates but not major and minor version updates. Becuase they are not yet at 1.0.0, this has the effect of allowing SemVer-compatible but not SemVer-breaking updates to them via Dependabot version update PRs.

This may be temporary and, in the case of getrandom, is intended to be temporary. For details, see comments in dependabot.yml, and:

This also expands the comment for holding back imara-diff (all referenced PRs in the file now have full URLs, not just numbers).

The effect of keeping back expectrl was tested and verified to be the only new hold needed to allow version updates to work, in: EliahKagan#111

This allows them to have patch version updates but not major and
minor version updates. Becuase they are not yet at 1.0.0, this has
the effect of allowing SemVer-compatible but not SemVer-breaking
updates to them via Dependabot version update PRs.

This may be temporary and, in the case of `getrandom`, is intended
to be temporary. For details, see comments in `dependabot.yml`, and:

- GitoxideLabs#2200 (comment)
- GitoxideLabs#2093 (comment)

This also expands the comment for holding back `imara-diff` (all
referenced PRs in the file now have full URLs, not just numbers).

The effect of keeping back `expectrl` was tested and verified to be
the only new hold needed to allow version updates to work, in:
#111
@EliahKagan EliahKagan enabled auto-merge October 2, 2025 15:28
Copy link
Member Author

@EliahKagan EliahKagan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's a bit annoying that the automatic CI job GitHub provides to check that dependabot.yml is valid doesn't usually run on PRs. After this merges, that check will be done, revealing whether or not I've made a mistake here.

(Sometimes I merge these in my own fork first to test their effects, but in this case that wasn't necessary to test whether version updates would be able to proceed with no other changes we can't easily adapt to. Also, it's time-consuming to merge these into my own fork, test them, and force-push back, partly because of the time to do it and the way it interferes with other work in my fork when done, but more so because Dependabot version update scans take a very long time very time they're run, both here and in my fork. The less imporant of the changes here--keeping back getrandom--will hopefully help somewhat with that, but I don't know how much.)

@EliahKagan EliahKagan merged commit 055b993 into GitoxideLabs:main Oct 2, 2025
29 checks passed
@EliahKagan EliahKagan deleted the expectrl branch October 2, 2025 15:49
EliahKagan added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 2, 2025
By running `cargo update`.

(It looks like holding back `getrandom`, as included in #2201, does
not enable Dependabot to cover all the transitive dependencies that
`cargo update` can update in its PRs.)
@Byron
Copy link
Member

Byron commented Oct 3, 2025

(Sometimes I merge these in my own fork first to test their effects, but in this case that wasn't necessary to test whether version updates would be able to proceed with no other changes we can't easily adapt to. Also, it's time-consuming to merge these into my own fork, test them, and force-push back, partly because of the time to do it and the way it interferes with other work in my fork when done, but more so because Dependabot version update scans take a very long time very time they're run, both here and in my fork. The less imporant of the changes here--keeping back getrandom--will hopefully help somewhat with that, but I don't know how much.)

No worries at all. I am totally OK with 'risking' minor breakage in the main repository if this saves a lot of hassle, while being easy to fix once it's clear if it's breaking or not.

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.

2 participants