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

Update zero-allocation-hashing to 0.16 #1116

Merged

Conversation

scala-steward
Copy link
Contributor

Updates net.openhft:zero-allocation-hashing from 0.10.1 to 0.16.

I'll automatically update this PR to resolve conflicts as long as you don't change it yourself.

If you'd like to skip this version, you can just close this PR. If you have any feedback, just mention me in the comments below.

Configure Scala Steward for your repository with a .scala-steward.conf file.

Have a fantastic day writing Scala!

Files still referring to the old version number

The following files still refer to the old version number (0.10.1).
You might want to review and update them manually.

bin/deltag.sh
Adjust future updates

Add this to your .scala-steward.conf file to ignore future updates of this dependency:

updates.ignore = [ { groupId = "net.openhft", artifactId = "zero-allocation-hashing" } ]

Or, add this to slow down future updates of this dependency:

dependencyOverrides = [{
  pullRequests = { frequency = "@monthly" },
  dependency = { groupId = "net.openhft", artifactId = "zero-allocation-hashing" }
}]

labels: library-update, old-version-remains, commit-count:1

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member

0.15 looks like a safe upgrade, but 0.16 is missing release notes — I opened OpenHFT/Zero-Allocation-Hashing#82 to ask them for some

@Friendseeker
Copy link
Member

c.c. OpenHFT/Zero-Allocation-Hashing#82 (comment)

Should be safe to update

@SethTisue
Copy link
Member

SethTisue commented Dec 28, 2023

let's not merge without explicit approval from @eed3si9n though, in case he sees some angle on this that we don't

@SethTisue SethTisue requested a review from eed3si9n December 28, 2023 17:01
Copy link
Member

@eed3si9n eed3si9n left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Probably ok? I don't really keep up with the implementation support libraries often since the potential downside is that it ends up breaking a bunch of things down the line since Zinc and sbt are sort of bottom of toolchain.

@eed3si9n eed3si9n merged commit 74dae17 into sbt:develop Dec 28, 2023
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.

None yet

4 participants