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

support sbt 1.x #32

Closed
SethTisue opened this issue Aug 14, 2017 · 20 comments
Closed

support sbt 1.x #32

SethTisue opened this issue Aug 14, 2017 · 20 comments
Assignees

Comments

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member

practice what we preach

@godenji
Copy link

godenji commented Oct 6, 2017

Can't publishLocal scala-xml with sbt 1.0 support due to this issue

Actually, nevermind, can just bump scala-xml's build.properties to 0.13.16 and ^publishLocal. Though it is a shame to have to download the entire sbt 0.13/scala 2.10 universe to build the project.

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

on hold until there is an sbt 1.x release that is Scala 2.13 friendly (the ticket on that is sbt/sbt#3427)

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

SethTisue commented Jan 10, 2018

sbt 1.1.0 is Scala 2.13-friendly, so this can move forward now.

@lrytz
Copy link
Member

lrytz commented Jan 10, 2018

cool! i'm still planning to push my work on supporting js/native through, which will (most likely) include an sbt 1 upgrade. current state summarized in scala/scala-parser-combinators#132 (comment).

@Sciss
Copy link

Sciss commented Mar 17, 2018

ping!

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

using sbt 1 requires building on Java 8. this is problematic because we still build the modules for Scala 2.11 on Java 6.

I suggest we drop Scala 2.11 support in all the modules, or at least, in any module wanting to upgrade to sbt 1 on its current development branch. (modules wanting to continue to release new versions for Scala 2.11 could do so from an older branch using sbt 0.13.)

then we can standardize on Java 8 and everything becomes simpler.

what do you think @lrytz?

@Sciss
Copy link

Sciss commented May 1, 2018

I wouldn't drop 2.11 support. Is there a problem compiling modules for 2.11 running on a JDK 8? you can still have a java target of 1.6 if it includes Java sources.

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

SethTisue commented May 1, 2018

Is there a problem compiling modules for 2.11 running on a JDK 8?

the danger is that you accidentally use Java 7 or 8 APIs, and then the resulting module doesn't work on Java 6 or 7.

so, another possibility in this space is to keep 2.11 support but drop Java 6 and 7 support and build everything on 8.

@Sciss
Copy link

Sciss commented May 1, 2018

Right - so I will opt for sticking to sbt 0.13 for the Swing module then.

@dwijnand
Copy link
Member

dwijnand commented May 1, 2018

another possibility in this space is to keep 2.11 support but drop Java 6 and 7 support and build everything on 8.

You could do that in a new version series of this plugin, so modules could independently give up on Java 6/7 and upgrade to sbt 1.

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

SethTisue commented May 1, 2018

You could do that in a new version series of this plugin

Yeah. I like it. We could start with scala-parallel-collections, which is already Scala 2.12+/Java8+ only anyway. And with scala-java8-compat, which supports 2.11 but (obviously) requires Java 8+.

I've also submitted a PR to scala-async to drop 2.11 support there, not sure if Jason will merge that one or not.

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

(Lukas is on vacation this week, so we'll have to wait for this thoughts.)

@lrytz
Copy link
Member

lrytz commented May 5, 2018

I have nothing to add :-) agree with the agreements.

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

Right - so I will opt for sticking to sbt 0.13 for the Swing module then.

I've made a new ticket to discuss that separately: scala/scala-swing#79

@SethTisue SethTisue self-assigned this Jun 9, 2018
@SethTisue SethTisue changed the title support sbt 1.1 support sbt 1.x Aug 8, 2018
@som-snytt
Copy link

I tried this today, in fact on the swing module.

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

SethTisue commented Feb 15, 2019

I deleted the master branch and created 1.x and 2.x branches (pointing to the same commit, to start). 1.x can continue as before, and I'll working on switching to sbt 1 on the 2.x branch

note that the outcome of the scala-swing discussion was that it's fine to switch their own 2.0.x branch to sbt 1

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

SethTisue commented Feb 16, 2019

WIP at #50. (I am secretly hoping to nerd-snipe @dwijnand and/or @eed3si9n into helping with the needed code changes — shhhhhhhhhh!)

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

keeping the ticket open until we've actually published a release and used it on at least one actual module

@dwijnand dwijnand reopened this Feb 16, 2019
@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

plugin 2.0.0 is published

I'm trying it out at scala/scala-partest#116 and https://github.com/scala/scala-partest/releases/tag/v1.1.9 and scala/scala#7774

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

well I'm running some partests in scala/scala locally and they're passing, so I think we can declare victory here

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

No branches or pull requests

6 participants