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

add sbt-whitesource #8209

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 15, 2019
Merged

add sbt-whitesource #8209

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 15, 2019

Conversation

SethTisue
Copy link
Member

also add jansi dependency for WhiteSource; it's shaded in the JLine
jar, so WhiteSource doesn't know about it unless we tell it

note that this version of sbt-whitesource respects 'skip in publish'

this is the 2.13.x version of the 2.12.x PR #8167

@scala-jenkins scala-jenkins added this to the 2.13.1 milestone Jul 10, 2019
Copy link
Member

@dwijnand dwijnand left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

But I'm not sure why you opt for a separate top-level .sbt file.

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

I'm not sure why you opt for a separate top-level .sbt file

I'll change that

@SethTisue SethTisue self-assigned this Jul 10, 2019
@SethTisue SethTisue added the internal not resulting in user-visible changes (build changes, tests, internal cleanups) label Jul 10, 2019
also add jansi dependency for WhiteSource; it's shaded in the JLine
jar, so WhiteSource doesn't know about it unless we tell it

note that this version of sbt-whitesource respects 'skip in publish'
@SethTisue SethTisue merged commit 609d5e0 into scala:2.13.x Jul 15, 2019
@SethTisue SethTisue deleted the whitesource-2.13 branch March 7, 2020 18:21
@SethTisue
Copy link
Member Author

SethTisue commented Mar 7, 2020

if I considered it at all, I must have thought that declaring the dependency as "optional" would prevent this, but Lukas and I noticed the other day that this caused an unintended change where in the distribution, the lib directory in 2.13.1 includes jansi.jar, though it didn't before. I don't think the extra JAR is used (the jline JAR has shaded jansi classes right there inside it) so it probably isn't causing any harm except consuming disk space, but I wanted to comment for the record anyway.

I would fix it, except that it seems very likely now that the JLine 3 PR (#8036) will land for 2.13.2, at which point we'll actually be using a separate jansi JAR anyway.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
internal not resulting in user-visible changes (build changes, tests, internal cleanups)
Projects
None yet
3 participants