5 packages from benfaerber/liquid-ml at 0.1.3

[benfaerber]

This pull-request concerns:

• liquid_interpreter.0.1.3: The interpreter for Liquid
• liquid_ml.0.1.3: Shopify's Liquid templating language in OCaml
• liquid_parser.0.1.3: The parser for Liquid
• liquid_std.0.1.3: The Standard Libarary for Liquid
• liquid_syntax.0.1.3: The Syntax Definitions for Liquid

---

• Homepage: https://github.com/benfaerber/liquid-ml
• Source repo: git+https://github.com/benfaerber/liquid-ml.git
• Bug tracker: https://github.com/benfaerber/liquid-ml/issues

---

🐫 Pull-request generated by opam-publish v2.7.1

[benfaerber]

Improved the liquid-ml project by adding robust testing via alcotest. Coverage via bisect_ppx. Autogenerating show functions using ppx_deriving. Fix various small bugs. Add a GitHub actions workflow.

[jmid]

Suggested change

	"calendar" { >= "3.0.0"}
	"calendar" { >= "3.0.0"}
	"batteries"

to fix

#=== ERROR while compiling liquid_syntax.0.1.3 ================================#
# context              2.5.0~beta1 | linux/x86_64 | ocaml-base-compiler.4.11.2 | pinned(https://github.com/benfaerber/liquid-ml/archive/refs/tags/0.1.2.tar.gz)
# path                 ~/.opam/4.11/.opam-switch/build/liquid_syntax.0.1.3
# command              ~/.opam/opam-init/hooks/sandbox.sh build dune build -p liquid_syntax -j 71
# exit-code            1
# env-file             ~/.opam/log/liquid_syntax-7-e2d28f.env
# output-file          ~/.opam/log/liquid_syntax-7-e2d28f.out
### output ###
# File "liquid_syntax/dune", line 3, characters 28-37:
# 3 |  (libraries base core stdio batteries re2 calendar)
#                                 ^^^^^^^^^
# Error: Library "batteries" not found.
# -> required by library "liquid_syntax" in _build/default/liquid_syntax
# -> required by _build/default/META.liquid_syntax
# -> required by _build/install/default/lib/liquid_syntax/META
# -> required by _build/default/liquid_syntax.install
# -> required by alias install

[benfaerber]

I dropped the requirement of batteries in this release. I just didn't tag it right so it tried to use the old 0.1.2 I believe.

[jmid]

Suggested change

	"ppx_deriving" { >= "v5.0" }
	"ppx_deriving" { >= "5.0" }

ppx_deriving doesn't use a v-prefixed version scheme.
Only a few exceptions do (base, core, stdio, re2, ...).

[jmid]

CI summary

• sha.1.10 is failing to build (due to a stricter gcc I think) in a lower bound search
• the usual opam-2.0 failures
• re2.v0.16.0 is failing to build on FreeBSD
• Cygwin MinGW is also failing with re2.v0.17.0 build failures
• MSys2 MinGW is failing with base_bigstring.v0.16.0 build failures

I'm wondering why one MinGW goes with v0.17.0 packages and the other one goes for v0.16.0 🤔

In any case, none of these can be blamed on liquid-ml, so LGTM 👍

Would you consider adding x-maintenance-intent entries for the packages?
https://github.com/ocaml/opam-repository/blob/master/governance/policies/archiving.md

[benfaerber]

Sounds good! I added the x-maintenance-intent entries.

[jmid]

Thanks! 🙏

[mseri]

Thanks!