Skip to content

Upgrade vendor "git" #175

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 1 commit into from
Nov 15, 2016
Merged

Upgrade vendor "git" #175

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 15, 2016

Conversation

thibaultmeyer
Copy link
Contributor

@thibaultmeyer thibaultmeyer commented Nov 15, 2016

Upgrade "git" via the command govendor

@strk
Copy link
Member

strk commented Nov 15, 2016

I've tried merging your PR locally and then issuing govendor update.
The result is more files changed, with vendor/vendor.json diff being:

diff --git a/vendor/vendor.json b/vendor/vendor.json
index 14feb1e..34c0384 100644
--- a/vendor/vendor.json
+++ b/vendor/vendor.json
@@ -3,10 +3,10 @@
        "ignore": "test",
        "package": [
                {
-                       "checksumSHA1": "X4WaxEtgFkM4VHg6TcNk2xkrqCI=",
+                       "checksumSHA1": "wpNJd6wl1MHYKjKiso1rzAcaMA0=",
                        "path": "code.gitea.io/git",
-                       "revision": "0807b517283977be34f0ff5510b21e676fc1527c",
-                       "revisionTime": "2016-11-13T14:20:52Z"
+                       "revision": "8e450d945dc3abda09b064617fdb31084b4e7447",
+                       "revisionTime": "2016-11-12T10:45:46Z"
                },
                {
                        "checksumSHA1": "/uhZZppDeb3Rbp3h8C0ALR3hdrA=",

Can you understand what does that mean ?

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Nov 15, 2016

Current coverage is 3.03% (diff: 100%)

Merging #175 into master will not change coverage

@@            master      #175   diff @@
========================================
  Files           33        33          
  Lines         8096      8096          
  Methods          0         0          
  Messages         0         0          
  Branches         0         0          
========================================
  Hits           246       246          
  Misses        7830      7830          
  Partials        20        20          

Powered by Codecov. Last update 56a8cf5...f0efd72

@strk
Copy link
Member

strk commented Nov 15, 2016

FYI: go get works fine with git submodules starting with versione 1.6: golang/go@761ac75

@thibaultmeyer
Copy link
Contributor Author

thibaultmeyer commented Nov 15, 2016

@strk, I don't know why your command govendor use a too older commit hash (8e450d945d who is ~30 commits back from last commit on master branch).

@strk
Copy link
Member

strk commented Nov 15, 2016

Maybe my call is wrong, how do you invoke it ? I did govendor update code.gitea.io/git

@thibaultmeyer
Copy link
Contributor Author

Maybe is me... I have called go vendor fetch code.gitea.io/git

@strk
Copy link
Member

strk commented Nov 15, 2016

Figured, go vendor update code.gitea.io/git took the code from my GOPATH, which was outdated.
Updating my local code and/or using fetch gives me a single change from your PR:

diff --git a/vendor/vendor.json b/vendor/vendor.json
index 14feb1e..59fe8fa 100644
--- a/vendor/vendor.json
+++ b/vendor/vendor.json
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
        "ignore": "test",
        "package": [
                {
-                       "checksumSHA1": "X4WaxEtgFkM4VHg6TcNk2xkrqCI=",
+                       "checksumSHA1": "NG9QAxoTz9rFH8054YQ3a9e9hs8=",
                        "path": "code.gitea.io/git",
                        "revision": "0807b517283977be34f0ff5510b21e676fc1527c",
                        "revisionTime": "2016-11-13T14:20:52Z"

Ideas about what that checksum is about ?

@strk
Copy link
Member

strk commented Nov 15, 2016

govendor v1.0.3, go version go1.6.2 linux/amd64

@thibaultmeyer
Copy link
Contributor Author

thibaultmeyer commented Nov 15, 2016

D:\Users\thiba\Documents>go version
go version go1.7.3 windows/amd64
D:\Users\thiba\Documents>govendor --version
v1.0.8

@strk
Copy link
Member

strk commented Nov 15, 2016

Question: is there anything particular you need from the new version of the git module ?
(ie: it may be useful to reduce vendor/ changes)

It looks like we're not alone with the checksum issue: https://github.com/kardianos/govendor/issues/233#issuecomment-254037185

@thibaultmeyer
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes, to get the newly added function GetCommitsInfoWithCustomConcurrency

@strk
Copy link
Member

strk commented Nov 15, 2016

Could you maybe include the vendor update as part of the PR making use of the new function ?

@strk
Copy link
Member

strk commented Nov 15, 2016

@bkcsoft, @tboerger, @lunny what do you think about setting a policy for vendor/ updating ?

@thibaultmeyer
Copy link
Contributor Author

thibaultmeyer commented Nov 15, 2016

if @bkcsoft, @tboerger, @lunny are OK with that, of course I can merge into one PR git module upgrade and new gitea feature.

@lunny
Copy link
Member

lunny commented Nov 15, 2016

Yes, we need a policy. Who can draft one?

@tboerger tboerger added the type/enhancement An improvement of existing functionality label Nov 15, 2016
@tboerger tboerger added this to the 1.0.0 milestone Nov 15, 2016
@tboerger
Copy link
Member

We can write a policy for it but for now LGTM

@strk
Copy link
Member

strk commented Nov 15, 2016

Well, given I can confirm this PR does upgrade 'git' module to an existing upstream state, it also LGTM.
Figuring out govendor's checksumSHA1 can wait...

@lunny lunny merged commit 871c964 into go-gitea:master Nov 15, 2016
@thibaultmeyer thibaultmeyer deleted the feature/upgrade-git-vendor branch January 28, 2017 08:17
ethantkoenig pushed a commit to ethantkoenig/gitea that referenced this pull request May 30, 2017
@go-gitea go-gitea locked and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 23, 2020
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
type/enhancement An improvement of existing functionality
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants