-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
Fix #11939: Set up MiMa for scala3-interfaces in scala3-library. #12371
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ | ||
|
||
import com.typesafe.tools.mima.core._ | ||
import com.typesafe.tools.mima.core.ProblemFilters._ | ||
|
||
object MiMaFilters { | ||
val Library: Seq[ProblemFilter] = Seq( | ||
// New APIs marked @experimental in 3.0.1 | ||
exclude[DirectMissingMethodProblem]("scala.quoted.Quotes#reflectModule#TermParamClauseMethods.isErased"), | ||
exclude[ReversedMissingMethodProblem]("scala.quoted.Quotes#reflectModule#TermParamClauseMethods.isErased"), | ||
exclude[MissingClassProblem]("scala.annotation.internal.ErasedParam"), | ||
exclude[MissingClassProblem]("scala.annotation.experimental"), | ||
) | ||
} |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
Can't we derive this from the version number?
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.
No. When the base version is 3.1.0, how do you know what's the previous version? It could be any 3.0.x for any value of x. You don't know without going through all the published version to determine which one is the latest 3.0.x.
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.
but couldn't you use 3.0.0 as a base (likewise for 3.0.2)? That means we can't reset the whitelist after every release but I don't think that's a big deal?
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.
We could get away with that. That's not the established practice, though. And it means that you lose the ability to reasonably check experimental stuff that you introduce in the meantime, which you'd like not to accidentally break, at least.
IMO that's not a good trade off, but I can change if you prefer that it be automatically determined.
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.
I think it's fine as is if it's established practice, but we need to add the need to update these variables to the release checklist /cc @anatoliykmetyuk