+
Skip to content

Conversation

gmlewis
Copy link
Collaborator

@gmlewis gmlewis commented Dec 4, 2019

Note to @willnorris - the only way I could figure out to get this to work (now with the inclusion of the scrape package) was to remove the go.mod and go.sum from the scrape directory. (Because v29 of go-github does not exist until the PR is committed and the repo is tagged.)

I'm thinking this makes the most sense anyway since the top-level go.mod covers the whole repo.

If you find a better mechanism, though, I'm totally happy to close this PR and go with the better solution.

@googlebot googlebot added the cla: yes Indication that the PR author has signed a Google Contributor License Agreement. label Dec 4, 2019
@gmlewis gmlewis requested a review from willnorris December 4, 2019 13:41
@gmlewis
Copy link
Collaborator Author

gmlewis commented Dec 4, 2019

Note to self: If this gets merged, then a release of this repo should be tagged with v29.0.0 before other PRs get merged.

@willnorris
Copy link
Collaborator

having a separate go.mod for the scrape package was very intentional (see #1308 (comment)). I likely won't be able to fully review this today, but do please wait to submit, as I'd like very much to keep the modules separate if at all possible.

/cc @dmitshur for comment and review as well

@willnorris
Copy link
Collaborator

what if you just leave the scrape package as relying on v28, and don't update that one in this change? Then, after this PR has landed and the new tag created, update the scrape package to use v29 in a separate change. Would that work?

@gmlewis
Copy link
Collaborator Author

gmlewis commented Dec 4, 2019

Ah! OK. Sorry about that. I will fix it tonight and let you know when it is ready for review.
Thank you, Will!

@gmlewis
Copy link
Collaborator Author

gmlewis commented Dec 5, 2019

Hi @willnorris - I believe this preserves the scrape versioning.

(I was a bit surprised that the dependencies of scrape are now being brought up into the top-level go.mod go.sum... and that they weren't before when scrape was first brought in. All I did to update go.mod go.sum was to run go test ./... and then all the scrape dependencies showed up... but I believe this is correct.)

PTAL.

@dmitshur
Copy link
Member

dmitshur commented Dec 5, 2019

I agree with Will’s comments. We must not remove the scrape/go.mod file as that would change module boundaries. It’s a good idea to keep this PR focused on just one module; updating the scrape module can be more safely done in later PRs.

Trying to make changes to more than one module (especially ones that are interconnected) in one PR is tricky and not worth doing until feeling very confident about the process.

Glenn, have you done go mod tidy in the latest version of this PR?

@gmlewis
Copy link
Collaborator Author

gmlewis commented Dec 5, 2019

Thank you, @dmitshur!

Now I've run 'go mod tidy'. 😄

PTAL.

Copy link
Member

@dmitshur dmitshur left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don’t see any issues. One minor inline comment.

go.mod Outdated
github.com/google/go-querystring v1.0.0
golang.org/x/crypto v0.0.0-20190308221718-c2843e01d9a2
golang.org/x/net v0.0.0-20190311183353-d8887717615a // indirect
golang.org/x/net v0.0.0-20191014212845-da9a3fd4c582 // indirect
Copy link
Member

@dmitshur dmitshur Dec 5, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This change doesn’t look intentional.

I suspect it came about from the earlier version of this PR where the scrape/go.mod file was removed, and its requirements merged with that of the main go-github module. The scrape module happened to require a newer version of x/net:

golang.org/x/net v0.0.0-20191014212845-da9a3fd4c582

And so it stayed around after go mod tidy because this module also needs x/net.

It’s not harmful to keep it since it’s just a newer x/net, but it’s also probably better to make changes intentionally rather than due to chance.

You can go back to original or stay with the newer, I’m okay with both.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah, I see. Thank you, @dmitshur!
Reverted.

@gmlewis gmlewis mentioned this pull request Jan 8, 2020
@gmlewis
Copy link
Collaborator Author

gmlewis commented Jan 8, 2020

We discussed this PR in #1365. Should we merge master into this PR before merging or just move ahead as-is? - Edit: Sorry, this comment was confusing... I was thinking somehow that we were operating in different branches and not performing the squash and merge (which will bring all the recent changes under v29).

I would like to get approval from @willnorris on this PR since this is the first one containing scrape.

Thank you!

Copy link
Collaborator

@willnorris willnorris left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yeah, I think this looks right and is consistent with what we discussed.

@gmlewis
Copy link
Collaborator Author

gmlewis commented Jan 8, 2020

Thank you, @willnorris !
Merging.

@gmlewis gmlewis merged commit cfb91a4 into google:master Jan 8, 2020
@gmlewis gmlewis deleted the v29 branch January 8, 2020 21:59
@gmlewis gmlewis restored the v29 branch January 8, 2020 22:05
@gmlewis
Copy link
Collaborator Author

gmlewis commented Jan 8, 2020

Ugh... I broke the build. Trying to figure out how to roll this back.

gmlewis added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 8, 2020
gmlewis added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 8, 2020
@gmlewis
Copy link
Collaborator Author

gmlewis commented Jan 9, 2020

#1367 should fix this release.

n1lesh pushed a commit to n1lesh/go-github that referenced this pull request Oct 2, 2020
n1lesh pushed a commit to n1lesh/go-github that referenced this pull request Oct 2, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

cla: yes Indication that the PR author has signed a Google Contributor License Agreement.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

点击 这是indexloc提供的php浏览器服务,不要输入任何密码和下载