Skip to content
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

Fix the build #691

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 5, 2021
Merged

Fix the build #691

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 5, 2021

Conversation

vemv
Copy link
Member

@vemv vemv commented Apr 5, 2021

Fixes the build by:

  • "soft-reverting" the suitable removal
    • it's now only enabled in test environments
    • that way, the tests will pass again, while not affecting end users
  • Disabling a specific clj-kondo pass for now
  • Fixing a broken test related to slurp
    • I can't make a super precise analyis but a few things seemed off:
      • (t/is (= ["application/octet-stream" {}])) always passes (there's just one hand to the =)
      • The result of hitting https://clojure.org/no-such-page is subject to change as it's a page outside CIDER's control
      • Anyway, the broken test revealed (?) that hitting a 404 page would throw an exception
        • It seems a good thing to handle that exception
        • Unknown: is the caught result usable for end users? (haven't tried)

@vemv vemv mentioned this pull request Apr 5, 2021
5 tasks
@vemv
Copy link
Member Author

vemv commented Apr 5, 2021

Verified green build over my personal Circle account:

image

@bbatsov bbatsov merged commit 3c72deb into clojure-emacs:master Apr 5, 2021
@bbatsov
Copy link
Member

bbatsov commented Apr 5, 2021

I wonder why the CI status is not visible on this PR, but I'll take your word for it. :-)

Big thanks for looking into this! 🙇‍♂️ I guess I'll have to do some thinking about the fate of the suitable dep - now that it's not maintained and it's broken on shadow-cljs perhaps we should just remove it altogether and go back to the old completion logic.

@bbatsov bbatsov mentioned this pull request Apr 5, 2021
@vemv
Copy link
Member Author

vemv commented Apr 5, 2021

🍻!

I wonder why the CI status is not visible on this PR, but I'll take your word for it. :-)

I think that Circle will just build in one of the two possible upstreams for a fork, if the fork itself is configured to build on Circle (which is what I did)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants