Skip to content

use upstream rust-cache action#22718

Merged
cburroughs merged 1 commit intopantsbuild:mainfrom
cburroughs:csb/upstream-rust-cache
Oct 5, 2025
Merged

use upstream rust-cache action#22718
cburroughs merged 1 commit intopantsbuild:mainfrom
cburroughs:csb/upstream-rust-cache

Conversation

@cburroughs
Copy link
Contributor

@cburroughs cburroughs commented Sep 30, 2025

With Swatinem/rust-cache#216 we should no longer need to diverge from upstream.

@cburroughs cburroughs self-assigned this Sep 30, 2025
@cburroughs cburroughs added the release-notes:not-required [CI] PR doesn't require mention in release notes label Sep 30, 2025
@cburroughs cburroughs changed the title wip: upstream cache use upstream rust-cache action Oct 3, 2025
@cburroughs
Copy link
Contributor Author

image

@cburroughs cburroughs marked this pull request as ready for review October 3, 2025 14:57
@cburroughs cburroughs requested a review from benjyw October 3, 2025 14:57
@cburroughs cburroughs merged commit a99d8fc into pantsbuild:main Oct 5, 2025
47 of 50 checks passed
cburroughs added a commit to cburroughs/pants that referenced this pull request Oct 5, 2025
Both pantsbuild#22718 and pantsbuild#22717 made changes to the generated workflows, but
not in a way that induced a merge conflict.

(This is FWIW the sort of thing that merge queues would catch.)
cburroughs added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 5, 2025
Both #22718 and #22717 made changes to the generated workflows, but not
in a way that induced a merge conflict.

(This is FWIW the sort of thing that merge queues would catch.)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

release-notes:not-required [CI] PR doesn't require mention in release notes

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants