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
Use Shapeless 2.2.5 for 0.2.0 #87
Conversation
d280206
to
82debfe
Compare
For some reason the non-compilation tests that confirm that there are no Because we're blocking these instances primarily to avoid confusing users, and since all other tests pass, I'm tempted to write this off as an issue with export-hook (or the non-compilation test mechanisms) and simply skip the tests on 2.10 (which is what I'm currently doing in this PR). |
fab10e2
to
5433731
Compare
Current coverage is
|
👍 would love to use circe now. |
5433731
to
242d697
Compare
👍 |
This PR has become a kind of grab-bag of last little things for 0.2.0, but I think they're mostly uncontroversial, so once it's green I'll publish 0.2.0. |
Use Shapeless 2.2.5 for 0.2.0
After publishing 0.1.2 this morning I realized that after some recent changes to
generic
and the upgrade to export-hook 1.0.2, we no longer absolutely need new changes in Shapeless 2.3.0.The changes here would allow us to publish circe 0.2.0 today against cats 0.2.0 and Shapeless 2.2.5. We'd then be able to spend some time with the bigger changes in #78, #79, and #85 and publish them in circe 0.3.0 when Shapeless 2.3.0 and cats 0.3.0 are available.
I hadn't fixed #55 and #57 because I was expecting them to be resolved when Shapeless's #453 is closed, but if we're publishing 0.2.0 against Shapeless 2.2.5 it makes sense to fix them now (so I did). If we go this route I'll open an issue about removing the ambiguous instances before 0.3.0