Fix: "project" should be "package"#11131
Closed
matthiasbeyer wants to merge 1 commit intorust-lang:masterfrom
Closed
Fix: "project" should be "package"#11131matthiasbeyer wants to merge 1 commit intorust-lang:masterfrom
matthiasbeyer wants to merge 1 commit intorust-lang:masterfrom
Conversation
This was accidentially overlooked when writing the documentation. Signed-off-by: Matthias Beyer <mail@beyermatthias.de>
|
Thanks for the pull request, and welcome! The Rust team is excited to review your changes, and you should hear from @ehuss (or someone else) soon. Please see the contribution instructions for more information. |
Muscraft
approved these changes
Sep 22, 2022
Member
Muscraft
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for this! You definitely were faster than I was!
To give more context to this PR. There were a few docs that contained [project] instead of [package] which isn't documented anywhere and really shouldn't be used anywhere. In the early days of cargo (2014 IIRC can't find the change) [project] was renamed to [package] and its remnants can be found in different places to this day (a lot in the testsuite).
Contributor
|
@bors r+ |
Contributor
Contributor
|
@bors retry |
Contributor
|
Testing bors fix |
Contributor
|
@bors r=epage |
Contributor
Member
|
There still seems to be an error with this. I'll cherry-pick the commit and add it to a branch of mine that needs it. That way it can get merged. |
Contributor
|
@bors r- |
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 27, 2022
Reduce references to `[project]` within cargo There was an issue (#11129) with `[project]` being put in the docs but nothing else stating what `[project]` is. This was an oversight by me when writing the docs as `[project]` is still supported in cargo. [Back in 2014](86b2a2a) `[project]` was [renamed to `[package]`](#3388 (comment)), since then it has kinda sat as something that exists and is supported but not really. I brought this up in a [zulip thread](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/246057-t-cargo/topic/removal.20of.20.60.5Bproject.5D.60), and it was suggested that we could show a warning when `[project]` is used in a manifest of a _top-level_ crate. To go slightly further than this I tried to change as many references from `[project]` to `[package]` as possible. This should hopefully help with confusion between `[project]` and `[package]` in the future. This PR also includes a cherry-picked commit from #11131 as it was having issues with bors and fits well with the changes that are being made in this PR. This should ideally be reviewed commit by commit
Member
|
Close as CI seems broken with no reason (why appveyor revives?!), and the commit is cherry-picked by #11135. Thank you for the quick fix anyway! |
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
7 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.
This was accidentially overlooked when writing the documentation.
Closes #11129
@Muscraft I hope I was faster than you!