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

check junit dependencies task can be skipped #1427

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jun 23, 2020

Conversation

j-baker
Copy link
Contributor

@j-baker j-baker commented Jun 23, 2020

No description provided.

@changelog-app
Copy link

changelog-app bot commented Jun 23, 2020

Generate changelog in changelog/@unreleased

Type

  • Feature
  • Improvement
  • Fix
  • Break
  • Deprecation
  • Manual task
  • Migration

Description

check junit dependencies task can be skipped

Check the box to generate changelog(s)

  • Generate changelog entry

@@ -63,6 +71,17 @@ public final void validateDependencies() {
});
}

@Classpath
public final Provider<List<Configuration>> getConfigurations() {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think gradle will get angry at you for using Provider<List<>> instead of ListProperty. If you want to have dynamic set of inputs you have to do it via getInputs() similarly to how you handle outputs

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this is using the same pattern as check unused dependencies. Propeties are differnet to providers, right?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this should be fine, right? There was a bug in Gradle 6.something that tried to cast Providers to CollectionPropertyInternal at some point, forcing you to use Propertys, but this was fixed?

carterkozak
carterkozak previously approved these changes Jun 23, 2020
@carterkozak carterkozak dismissed their stale review June 23, 2020 13:10

see robk comment

@j-baker
Copy link
Contributor Author

j-baker commented Jun 23, 2020

I validated that this works locally

@CRogers
Copy link
Contributor

CRogers commented Jun 23, 2020

👍

@j-baker j-baker merged commit 22754af into develop Jun 23, 2020
@j-baker j-baker deleted the jbaker/even_more_incremental branch June 23, 2020 15:21
@svc-autorelease
Copy link
Collaborator

Released 3.31.0

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants