-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 11
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
Add API Baseline checking to the build #265
Add API Baseline checking to the build #265
Conversation
@@ -180,6 +180,14 @@ | |||
</plugins> | |||
</build> | |||
</profile> | |||
<profile> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think there's something missing here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
- add plugin definition for compare-attached-artifacts-with-release which defines the goal compare-version-with-baselines fixes eclipse-cdt#212
You would have to update Maven version at
|
795b3ed
to
0aff645
Compare
@jonahgraham I would like to skip this API baseline check to the next release, which should be 2.0.0, because the API has changed since last v1.0.0 release. I want to check and refactor what must be API. There is a lot of stuff which can be made internal. |
Yes - that is a good idea. There doesn't need to be API stability yet and I don't think there needs to be such expectations yet. |
In light of conversation in #265 (comment) lets make it explicit that there is no API guarantee yet.
In light of conversation in #265 (comment) lets make it explicit that there is no API guarantee yet.
pom.xml
Outdated
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ | |||
<!-- | |||
Copyright (c) 2023 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation. | |||
Copyright (c) 2024 Contributors to the Eclipse Foundation. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
2024
2023, 2024
Okay, the change has been build now. @jonahgraham or @ruspl-afed: I don't know why the API check claims missing |
In theory it should request new tag for public types/members added after baseline. |
Which baseline is used or should be used for cdt-lsp? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
I know how unpleasant and hopeless a duel with releng can be, but you managed to win @ghentschke!
I believe that the CDT LSP baseline should point to the previous release of CDT LSP (regardless to the version contributed to SimRel). And this is more or less what we have now with Also, there is a slippery spot in pom that defines baseline repo through SimRel aggregated repo, But what you already did is the good basement for the further improvements. |
as mentioned here: eclipse-cdt#265 (comment)
as mentioned here: #265 (comment)
fixes #212