Switch to libuv 1.4.2 on new libuv home #22
Conversation
|
Yeah, I guess jumping straight to 1.1.0 should be fine. |
|
LGTM. Please amend commit to reflect the correct version number. |
muojp
changed the title
|
@akoeplinger @ahmetalpbalkan Thank you for reviewing. |
|
@davidfowl please merge. |
|
We need to update Kestrel before accepting this I think. Kestrel is ultimately the only component that uses libuv. |
|
@Eilon it shouldn't matter as 1.x is compatible (SemVer ftw 😄) |
|
Understood; I'm just saying we need to update Kestrel as well so that we can be consistent in which version of libuv we're using. |
|
@Eilon yeah, that makes sense. Opened aspnet/KestrelHttpServer#50 to track it. |
|
Thanks. Waiting for @lodejard to return from vacation to look at these. |
muojp
force-pushed
the
master
branch
2 times, most recently
from
3f0afa9 to
ea7e2ea
Compare
|
Update: modified this PR to cover 1.0.0-beta2 |
|
@lodejard pinging again to see if we can upgrade image to libuv 1.1.0 in the docker image |
|
The latest stable is now 1.4.2 already 😄 |
|
I believe we can rely on manual testing + CI to update this. @muojp frel free to uodate PR with latest libuv release. Sorry for being slow on this. |
|
@ahmetalpbalkan sure. I'll update the PR in several hours. |
muojp
force-pushed
the
master
branch
2 times, most recently
from
5e40002 to
6efc735
Compare
muojp
changed the title
|
@ahmetalpbalkan @lodejard Hope #38 will be also updated once this PR is merged. Also, maybe it's about time for us to prepare some policies for stopping maintenance of older betas for focusing on keeping up with latest ones instead. Making middle-wares used on older betas partially up to date sometimes cause painful troubles on users (tho I don't see there are any atm). In my opinion, we could limit performing maintenance against (N-1)-th & N-th beta (N=current) which is suitable for most users. Of course, this could be argued in another issue. |
|
@muojp can you update beta3 as well? |
|
@ahmetalpbalkan Updated to cover beta 3. 🐱 |
|
@muojp You rock. 🤘 |
Made this PR regarding the discussion: #21
I also performed a quick test against latest libuv 1.1.0 and it worked fine. Maybe we shall jump to 1.1.0 instead of 1.0.2. Regarding 1.1.0 changelog, there are no significant changes (especially for unix env.), so in my opinion skipping 1.0.2 and move on to 1.1.0 is relatively safe.