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

stack upgrade should always use implicit global project #1392

borsboom opened this issue Nov 21, 2015 · 1 comment

stack upgrade should always use implicit global project #1392

borsboom opened this issue Nov 21, 2015 · 1 comment


Copy link

In particular, this is an issue if the current project uses Docker integration, since the new stack binary will be installed in ~/.local/bin in the container (and that binary may not be compatible with the host's platform), which is almost certainly not intended since that stack binary won't ever actually be used.

While we could force stack upgrade to disable Docker integration, there are cases where the rest of the project's stack.yaml don't make sense in a non-Docker context and so it would fail. Therefore, better to just have stack upgrade always use the implicit global project in ~/.stack/global-project.

Steps to reproduce:
  1. Create a project with a stack.yaml that enables Docker integration
  2. Run stack upgrade in the project
Expected results:

stack --version shows that stack has been upgraded on the host.

Actual results:

stack --version on the host is unchanged, since the new stack executable was only installed in the container.

@borsboom borsboom added this to the P2: Should milestone Nov 21, 2015
Copy link

mgsloan commented May 15, 2016

stack upgrade now only pays attention to CLI args and the global configuration.

It does not use the global project, since it uses the stack.yaml provided with stack, falling back on the global project. Does that seem like a reasonable modification, @borsboom ?

@mgsloan mgsloan closed this as completed May 15, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet

No branches or pull requests

2 participants