Remove stale extension entries from lockfile if module order changes#19659
Closed
fmeum wants to merge 1 commit intobazelbuild:masterfrom
Closed
Remove stale extension entries from lockfile if module order changes#19659fmeum wants to merge 1 commit intobazelbuild:masterfrom
fmeum wants to merge 1 commit intobazelbuild:masterfrom
Conversation
Collaborator
Author
|
Stacked on #19658. Let me know if you would like me to merge the two PRs. |
3284af3 to
ea16c70
Compare
Collaborator
Author
|
@bazel-io flag |
Member
|
@bazel-io fork 6.4.0 |
SalmaSamy
approved these changes
Sep 29, 2023
Member
|
@fmeum @SalmaSamy Should I go ahead and close #19658? They look the same, but this PR has more changes. |
Collaborator
Author
|
@iancha1992 Could you merge #19658 first and then the current PR? That way we would preserve them as two separate commits, each with its own message. |
ea16c70 to
c33a84d
Compare
Previously, extension entries in the lockfile were not removed when only the BFS order of modules using the extension changed. However, this change is visible in the module extension implementation function and must thus be considered when checking for staleness.
c33a84d to
d648afb
Compare
Collaborator
Author
|
@SalmaSamy @iancha1992 I resolved the merge conflict in case you haven't already done that on the imported CL. |
bazel-io
pushed a commit
to bazel-io/bazel
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 4, 2023
Previously, extension entries in the lockfile were not removed when only the BFS order of modules using the extension changed. However, this change is visible in the module extension implementation function and must thus be considered when checking for staleness. Closes bazelbuild#19659. PiperOrigin-RevId: 570720034 Change-Id: I5836b6e1a0172e5d930fcfdacbea53fc090d300d
meteorcloudy
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 4, 2023
…changes (#19730) Previously, extension entries in the lockfile were not removed when only the BFS order of modules using the extension changed. However, this change is visible in the module extension implementation function and must thus be considered when checking for staleness. Closes #19659. Commit aa458e0 PiperOrigin-RevId: 570720034 Change-Id: I5836b6e1a0172e5d930fcfdacbea53fc090d300d Co-authored-by: Fabian Meumertzheim <fabian@meumertzhe.im>
Member
|
The changes in this PR have been included in Bazel 6.4.0 RC2. Please test out the release candidate and report any issues as soon as possible. If you're using Bazelisk, you can point to the latest RC by setting USE_BAZEL_VERSION=last_rc. |
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
6 participants
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.
Previously, extension entries in the lockfile were not removed when only the BFS order of modules using the extension changed. However, this change is visible in the module extension implementation function and must thus be considered when checking for staleness.