refactor(ci): migrate to sbt-ci-release #1962

ckipp01 · 2022-12-22T11:42:13Z

This pr changes the way we do releases and migrates us away from the
forked sbt-release-early that's no longer maintained and is also
bringing in some old versions of scala-xml which will be problematic
when we try to update our sbt stuff.

Plus this simplifies the release a little bit. The one difference is
that we'll now be publishing actual -SNAPSHOT into sonatype snapshots.

Refs: #1680

ckipp01

One other thing I noticed is that we actually publish bloop-shared. However the other modules are using it via dependsOn and I don't think anything else actually uses this. Do we need to keep publishing it separately?

.github/workflows/ci.yml

ckipp01 · 2022-12-22T11:43:27Z

.github/workflows/ci.yml

-          mkdir "$HOME/.ssh"
-          mkdir "$HOME/.sbt"
-          mkdir "$HOME/.sbt/gpg"


It's seems that this and also the couple things that I removed down below are all covered by sbt-ci-release, so there shouldn't be any reason to manually do this anymore. We won't really be able to tell until we just try.

julienrf

Thank you @ckipp01, this simplifies the build a lot!

Could you please check that versionScheme is defined?

.github/workflows/ci.yml

build.sbt

ckipp01 · 2022-12-22T13:14:00Z

Could you please check that versionScheme is defined?

It's actually not. I'm assuming we want to early-semver for this, or did you have something else in mind?

julienrf · 2022-12-22T13:26:37Z

Could you please check that versionScheme is defined?

It's actually not. I'm assuming we want to early-semver for this, or did you have something else in mind?

early-semver would be perfect, but now that I start thinking about it I wonder if things are more complex than that. Especially the fact that we publish artifacts that contain shaded dependencies and others that don’t shade (probably those types of artifacts should have independent version numbers…).

In any case, if we claim that this project follows early-semver, then we should also set up checks to make sure we effectively conform to that claim. That means setting up MiMa or using sbt-version-policy.

I think that should be addressed separately.

ckipp01 · 2022-12-22T13:35:15Z

I think that should be addressed separately.

Yes, I agree. Regarding even the versioning of the shaded stuff, I don't even think we need to shade. I was talking to the other offline about this, created this discussion and also this pr to address / talk about it because the shading also brings a ton of complexity that is all to avoid hypothetical issues as far as I can tell. Seeing that so few tools use Bloop and we mostly know about them, I feel ok dropping that and then readdressing if we do indeed have an issue.

adpi2 · 2022-12-23T08:34:52Z

build.sbt

    (publish / skip) := true,
-    publishLocalAllModules := {
-      BuildDefaults
-        .publishLocalAllModules(allProjectsToRelease)


It seems that allProjectsToRelease contained more project than allProjectReferences. In the diff there are all the shaded and the buildpress projects. Will they be released by ci-release or, is it okay not to release them?

Ah good catch, yes I am missing a couple that I didn't realize weren't in there. I knew the shaded stuff wasn't in there, but I was hoping to get some thoughts on #1961 before finishing up this pr 😆. Apart from that it looks like I'm also missing the build press stuff. Just to compare here's what a publishLocal will give you:

bloop-backend_2.12 bloop-frontend_2.12 bloop-js-bridge-0-6_2.12 bloop-js-bridge-1_2.12 bloop-launcher-core_2.12 bloop-launcher-core_2.13 bloop-launcher-test_2.12 bloop-native-bridge-0-4_2.12 bloop-shared_2.12 bloopgun-core_2.12 bloopgun-core_2.13 sbt-bloop sockets

vs what was in the publish list before:

bloopShared, // TODO do we actually need to publish this??? backend, frontend, sbtBloop, nativeBridge04, jsBridge06, jsBridge1, sockets, bloopgun, bloopgunShaded, bloopgun213, bloopgunShaded213, launcher, launcherShaded, launcher213, launcherShaded213, buildpressConfig, buildpress

I'll make sure the others get added, but it'll be nice to get some thoughts on the shaded stuff first, because ideally we wouldn't have to include those here as well.

Alright now that the shaded stuff is gone, the new publish list will look like this:

bloop-backend_2.12 bloop-frontend_2.12 bloop-js-bridge-0-6_2.12 bloop-js-bridge-1_2.12 bloop-launcher-core_2.12 bloop-launcher-core_2.13 bloop-native-bridge-0-4_2.12 bloop-shared_2.12 bloopgun-core_2.12 bloopgun-core_2.13 buildpress_2.12 buildpressconfig_2.12 sbt-bloop sockets

tgodzik

This looks awesome! Thanks @ckipp01 for looking into all those issues! 😍

This pr changes the way we do releases and migrates us away from the forked sbt-release-early that's no longer maintained and is also bringing in some old versions of scala-xml which will be problematic when we try to update our sbt stuff. Plus this simplifies the release a little bit. The one difference is that we'll now be publishing actual `-SNAPSHOT` into sonatype snapshots.

This needed to be done after the work on moving to sbt-ci-release due to scala-xml conflicts. Supercedes #1925 Supercedes #1899

ckipp01 requested review from tgodzik and adpi2 December 22, 2022 11:42

ckipp01 commented Dec 22, 2022

View reviewed changes

This was referenced Dec 22, 2022

build(deps): Update sbt from 1.7.2 to 1.7.3 #1925

Closed

build(deps): Update sbt-native-packager from 1.8.1 to 1.9.11 #1899

Closed

ckipp01 force-pushed the sbt-ci-release branch from f14a60e to c370ba9 Compare December 22, 2022 12:57

julienrf reviewed Dec 22, 2022

View reviewed changes

.github/workflows/ci.yml Show resolved Hide resolved

.github/workflows/ci.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

.github/workflows/ci.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

build.sbt Show resolved Hide resolved

adpi2 reviewed Dec 23, 2022

View reviewed changes

tgodzik approved these changes Dec 23, 2022

View reviewed changes

ckipp01 added 3 commits December 24, 2022 08:42

chore(deps): update sbt to 1.8.0 and sbt-native-packager to 1.9.11

11b4197

This needed to be done after the work on moving to sbt-ci-release due to scala-xml conflicts. Supercedes #1925 Supercedes #1899

chore(ci): more cleanup and set the versionScheme

99501df

ckipp01 force-pushed the sbt-ci-release branch 2 times, most recently from 60a75d9 to 77e00cf Compare December 24, 2022 10:27

revert: remove versionScheme

a94f8ce

ckipp01 force-pushed the sbt-ci-release branch from 77e00cf to a94f8ce Compare December 24, 2022 11:17

ckipp01 merged commit 2b4ee8a into main Dec 27, 2022

ckipp01 deleted the sbt-ci-release branch December 27, 2022 08:07

ckipp01 mentioned this pull request Dec 27, 2022

[EPIC] Bloop Next Steps #1680

Closed

16 tasks

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

refactor(ci): migrate to sbt-ci-release #1962

refactor(ci): migrate to sbt-ci-release #1962

ckipp01 commented Dec 22, 2022

ckipp01 left a comment

ckipp01 Dec 22, 2022

julienrf left a comment

ckipp01 commented Dec 22, 2022

julienrf commented Dec 22, 2022

ckipp01 commented Dec 22, 2022 •

edited

Loading

adpi2 Dec 23, 2022

ckipp01 Dec 23, 2022

ckipp01 Dec 24, 2022 •

edited

Loading

tgodzik left a comment

refactor(ci): migrate to sbt-ci-release #1962

refactor(ci): migrate to sbt-ci-release #1962

Conversation

ckipp01 commented Dec 22, 2022

ckipp01 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ckipp01 Dec 22, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

julienrf left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ckipp01 commented Dec 22, 2022

julienrf commented Dec 22, 2022

ckipp01 commented Dec 22, 2022 • edited Loading

adpi2 Dec 23, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ckipp01 Dec 23, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ckipp01 Dec 24, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tgodzik left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ckipp01 commented Dec 22, 2022 •

edited

Loading

ckipp01 Dec 24, 2022 •

edited

Loading