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 MPR#7852 by reverting #1737 #2092

Merged
merged 5 commits into from Oct 8, 2018
Merged

Fix MPR#7852 by reverting #1737 #2092

merged 5 commits into from Oct 8, 2018

Conversation

trefis
Copy link
Contributor

@trefis trefis commented Oct 5, 2018

Fixes MPR#7852 by reverting GPR #1737 .

It's currently impossible to test trunk on janestreet's codebase (and probably on a good chunk of opam) because of this bug, so let's do the quick fix and we can have a look later at how to arrange things.

Ping @Drup , @hhugo .

Copy link
Contributor

@Drup Drup left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This makes me sad. The fault lies in the implementation in Env, not in your patch. Let's revert until we have a better solution.

Copy link
Member

@gasche gasche left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good to go if the CI passes.

In my experience it's tricky to remember to re-merge these things once they are reverted. Maybe one way to avoid this would be to open a new PR with the (about-to-be-reverted code), the WIP status, and a pointer to the issues that were created.

@trefis
Copy link
Contributor Author

trefis commented Oct 5, 2018

I had forgotten to git add the new test file 😆
Running the CI again.

@trefis trefis merged commit 63dbb11 into ocaml:trunk Oct 8, 2018
@trefis trefis deleted the revert-1737 branch October 8, 2018 11:39
@damiendoligez
Copy link
Member

@trefis will you open a new PR as suggested by @gasche? Or should I do it?

@trefis
Copy link
Contributor Author

trefis commented Oct 18, 2018

Meh. I'm not sure it's worth it honestly.
There were regression tests for #1737, which I left in (the output is just not what we'd want them to be). Apart from that I'm not sure an open GPR with no content buried 5 pages away on the GPR list is going to be much of a reminder.

Also, AFAICT, it'd be a non trivial amount of work to get that thing to work properly with the current architecture. (There might be some horrible hacks we can implement to get it working without too much work, but I really don't want to go there)

@gasche
Copy link
Member

gasche commented Oct 18, 2018

Could someone produce a clear explanation, somewhere, of what the problem is? @trefis and @Drup appear to know what the problem is, but there are no explanations in MPR#7852 for others to understand.

@trefis
Copy link
Contributor Author

trefis commented Oct 18, 2018

I'll write something up.

@damiendoligez
Copy link
Member

ping @trefis

@trefis
Copy link
Contributor Author

trefis commented Jan 10, 2019

I updated MPR#7852.

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