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
Update sbt-github-actions and sbt-spiewak-sonatype #322
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #322 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 96.47% 96.28% -0.20%
==========================================
Files 9 9
Lines 1049 1049
Branches 94 94
==========================================
- Hits 1012 1010 -2
- Misses 37 39 +2
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
480ba43
to
cd74155
Compare
cd74155
to
093dc33
Compare
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.
Wait so this means all users going forward not on 2.11 have to be on Java 11 right?
I'm a bit worried here. What are the pros and cons of adopting Java 11 as the minimum version?
Hi @johnynek!
that's not the intent. We want to target JVM 8 (for now) regardless of the JVM version used to buid/publish the jar. The I double checked and class files for the different scala versions have |
btw, this is required because the underlying plugin that we use for CI switched from 8 to 11 as default and we use it to publish the jars. |
sorry for the latency on reviewing this. It looks right to me. It would be interesting to think about adding some assertion that the built jars have the right class number, but I don't think we should block this (maybe a feature request for sbt-spiewak). |
No description provided.