Skip to content

Upgrade bazel travis to 0.12.0 #505

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
May 19, 2018
Merged

Upgrade bazel travis to 0.12.0 #505

merged 7 commits into from
May 19, 2018

Conversation

ittaiz
Copy link
Contributor

@ittaiz ittaiz commented May 18, 2018

Hopefully this supersedes #481 (cc @pauldraper)
Like discussed on the ticket I've changed the assertion (due to the naming it was pointless to loosen the assertion so I changed it a bit).

@ittaiz ittaiz changed the title Upgrade bazel travis to 0.14.0 Upgrade bazel travis to 0.13.0 May 18, 2018
@ittaiz ittaiz requested a review from johnynek May 18, 2018 19:46
@ittaiz
Copy link
Contributor Author

ittaiz commented May 18, 2018

also apologies for this dragging on for some time

@ittaiz
Copy link
Contributor Author

ittaiz commented May 18, 2018

@johnynek it seems that we have a problem with 0.13.0 and protobuf repository.

The value 'REPOSITORY_NAME' has been removed in favor of 'repository_name()', please use the latter (https://docs.bazel.build/versions/master/skylark/lib/native.html#repository_name). You can temporarily allow the old name by using --incompatiblePackageNameIsAFunction=false

https://travis-ci.org/bazelbuild/rules_scala/jobs/380855273
On master of protobuf this is still the deprecated form so we should probably open an issue to them.
I want to see that it works with 0.12.0 and then I'll open the relevant issue

@ittaiz ittaiz changed the title Upgrade bazel travis to 0.13.0 Upgrade bazel travis to 0.12.0 May 18, 2018
@johnynek
Copy link
Contributor

huh, are we using an old sha?

Pretty frustrating if google can't even keep up with the deprecation cycle they create.

@ittaiz
Copy link
Contributor Author

ittaiz commented May 18, 2018

We're using an older sha but even on master it isn't fixed.
yeah, it is a bit frustrating.
I think I'll mention it (in a good way) in the issue.

@ittaiz
Copy link
Contributor Author

ittaiz commented May 18, 2018

@buchgr the buildkite failed very strangely. Any chance you can take a look?
Funny enough the files changed don't relate to the bazel build on buildkite...
https://source.cloud.google.com/results/invocations/58d04d31-55ae-48a6-a459-03f77d037cce/targets

@ittaiz ittaiz merged commit 5095971 into master May 19, 2018
@buchgr
Copy link
Contributor

buchgr commented May 22, 2018

Sorry I missed this. Is there still a problem?

@johnynek johnynek deleted the upgrade_bazel_travis branch May 22, 2018 18:23
@ittaiz
Copy link
Contributor Author

ittaiz commented May 22, 2018

I think it is. Do you understand the failure?

ianoc-stripe pushed a commit to ianoc-stripe/rules_scala that referenced this pull request Jun 12, 2018
@ittaiz ittaiz mentioned this pull request Jun 27, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants