-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
Cross Build for SBT 1.0.0 #18
Comments
http://www.scala-sbt.org/1.0/docs/sbt-1.0-Release-Notes.html#Improvements
|
In other words: sbt-doge has been folded into sbt 1, so it's no longer required. That's why there's no release of it for sbt 1. |
@dwijnand I'm trying to migrate from sbt-doge to SBT 1.0, but I can't find a way to replace strict aggregation ( |
From sbt-doge's README:
From
I think it means that sbt 1's |
From my experience, "Only projects that are listed to be binary compatible with the selected Scala version have their Scala version switched" when I use If you want I can build a minimal example showing the problem. |
There seems to be no replacement for doge's strict aggregation in SBT 1.0 and implementing the logic to our projects is far from trivial, judging from the machinery in this plugin. @dwijnand is there a chance that you might cross compile and publish sbt-doge for SBT 1.0, since not all features were ported to the SBT 1.0 core? Can you reopen this issue until then so that users may easily find this information if they are looking for ways to port their builds like me? |
Yep. Done.
I'm not totally against doing that, but I wonder if perhaps a better way forward is to fix/add this to sbt 1 proper. Thoughts, @eed3si9n / @jroper? |
I named sbt-doge as doge because it was meant to be a proof of concept / hack to demonstrate the problem with sbt's aggregation, and not a serious plugin. |
I'd say it should be fixed in sbt, but I'm not sure what the fix is - my big question is whether anyone depends on the current ++ behaviour, or if we can just modify ++ to do strict aggregation. I'm not sure why anyone would want the current ++ behaviour and not strict aggregation, originally when I implemented strict aggregation, I just modified the existing ++ command, but then on @eed3si9n's advice we created the new +++ command for it. Based on the discussion: I don't think a lot of thought was put into it by either of us. If anyone can come up with a reason that ++ shouldn't be modified to have sbt-doges +++ behaviour, then maybe we could talk about an alternative solution, but short of that, I'd say the solution is to modify ++ to have the +++ behaviour. But I completely agree with all the reasons above not to cross build sbt-doge against sbt 1.0. sbt-doge was a fork of sbt 0.13's cross build support, we've gone to all the effort of merging it back into sbt (which wasn't trivial and had a lot of teething issues that needed to be fixed), the last thing we want is to resurrect the fork and be back in the same place that we were before. |
I fully agree that this behavior should be in sbt, not in a plugin. I also think that the default behavior of |
I would suggest a prominent section be added to the README in this repo explaining the situation w/r/t sbt 1 |
I opened sbt/sbt#3698 in order to continue this discussion. |
No description provided.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: