5 packages from benfaerber/liquid-ml at 0.1.3 #28951
Conversation
|
Improved the |
| "core" { >= "v0.15.0" } | ||
| "stdio" { >= "v0.10.0" } | ||
| "re2" { >= "v0.13.0" } | ||
| "calendar" { >= "3.0.0"} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| "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
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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.
benfaerber
force-pushed
the
opam-publish-liquid_interpreter.0.1.3
branch
3 times, most recently
from
2d8f90b to
6d3f1fc
Compare
| "stdio" { >= "v0.10.0" } | ||
| "re2" { >= "v0.13.0" } | ||
| "calendar" { >= "3.0.0" } | ||
| "ppx_deriving" { >= "v5.0" } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| "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, ...).
benfaerber
force-pushed
the
opam-publish-liquid_interpreter.0.1.3
branch
5 times, most recently
from
a1f4ee3 to
79565ea
Compare
jmid
left a comment
jmid
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
CI summary
sha.1.10is failing to build (due to a stricter gcc I think) in a lower bound search- the usual opam-2.0 failures
re2.v0.16.0is failing to build on FreeBSD- Cygwin MinGW is also failing with
re2.v0.17.0build failures - MSys2 MinGW is failing with
base_bigstring.v0.16.0build 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
force-pushed
the
opam-publish-liquid_interpreter.0.1.3
branch
from
79565ea to
fbe62b6
Compare
|
Sounds good! I added the |
|
Thanks! 🙏 |
|
Thanks! |
3 participants
This pull-request concerns:
liquid_interpreter.0.1.3: The interpreter for Liquidliquid_ml.0.1.3: Shopify's Liquid templating language in OCamlliquid_parser.0.1.3: The parser for Liquidliquid_std.0.1.3: The Standard Libarary for Liquidliquid_syntax.0.1.3: The Syntax Definitions for Liquid🐫 Pull-request generated by opam-publish v2.7.1