Skip to content

montly report #1854

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Feb 22, 2025
Merged

montly report #1854

merged 4 commits into from
Feb 22, 2025

Conversation

Byron
Copy link
Member

@Byron Byron commented Feb 22, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Tasks

  • report
  • update timesheets
  • publish on reddit

@Byron Byron force-pushed the montly-report branch 2 times, most recently from 998bf44 to 0649537 Compare February 22, 2025 15:13
@Byron Byron marked this pull request as ready for review February 22, 2025 16:37
@Byron Byron enabled auto-merge February 22, 2025 16:38
@Byron Byron merged commit 16a248b into main Feb 22, 2025
21 checks passed
EliahKagan added a commit to EliahKagan/gitoxide that referenced this pull request Feb 25, 2025
@EliahKagan
Revert "make auditing pass the hard way"
0c47464 
In 0e9299c (GitoxideLabs#1854), RUSTSEC-2025-0007 was listed as ignored to let
`cargo deny advisories` pass. That advisory has been withdrawn, as
noted in https://rustsec.org/advisories/RUSTSEC-2025-0007.html:

> After this advisory was published, the author graciously agreed
> to give access to the rustls team. The rustls team is committed
> to providing security (only) maintenance for *ring* for the
> foreseeable future.

It is no longer necessary to list that advisory as ignored.

This reverts commit 0e9299c.
@emilazy
Copy link
Contributor

emilazy commented Mar 22, 2025

What causes the additional panic!() newline? I’m not seeing it here with Rust 1.84.1 on macOS, and the tests are failing as a result. Is it a 1.85 change?

@Byron Byron deleted the montly-report branch March 23, 2025 01:55
@Byron
Copy link
Member Author

Byron commented Mar 23, 2025

I don't exactly know what you are referring to but am assuming it's a failing journey test that wants to see specific line numbers in a traceback?
If so, then yes, there is a test that is prone to failure either if the underlying code changes, or if something in the panic handler changes.

@emilazy
Copy link
Contributor

emilazy commented Mar 23, 2025

Talking about cf98a15; I'm not getting that extra newline and so the journey tests are broken for me. Doesn't seem to be a line number thing, I'm just not seeing the leading newline.

@Byron
Copy link
Member Author

Byron commented Mar 24, 2025

Right - I remember that with some new Rust release, the leading newline appeared which was taken as expected value then.
CI still seems to agree which I suppose makes it a requirement. Ideally, this would be no dependency on something this 'flaky', so it's worth rewriting the test so the output of the program is filtered down to what matters. The test-suite has support for filters already, and doing so might be relevant for portability as different versions of Rustc produce difference outputs.

@EliahKagan EliahKagan mentioned this pull request Apr 8, 2025
Merged
4 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@Byron @emilazy