-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13k
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
Prepare 1.85 beta release #135163
Prepare 1.85 beta release #135163
Conversation
@bors r+ p=100 |
Prepare 1.85 beta release r? `@ghost`
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
Turns out that Manually removed the broken replacement from the commit, will send a tooling change later. @bors r+ p=100 |
@bors rollup=never |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@bors r- PR CI failed. Will investigate. |
Prepare 1.85 beta release r? `@ghost`
Congrats bors you're broken. @bors retry |
Prepare 1.85 beta release r? `@ghost`
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
💔 Test failed - checks-actions |
Same error as the one encountered when preparing the previous beta version, #133447 (comment) |
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
…ark-Simulacrum Revert rust-lang#131365 This PR reverts rust-lang#131365, following the revert we did on the beta branches for both 1.84 and 1.85. While the PR passes CI successfully on master, as soon as we branch off beta it starts failing in the newly created beta branch. This caused the release team to revert it for both 1.84 and 1.85, and if nothing is done it would continue being reverted every cycle. `@heiseish` (PR author) feel free to submit the PR again in the future: this revert doesn't represent the release team rejecting your change, but just a (hopefully temporary!) revert to ensure future beta branches can be created without reverting it each time. When submitting the PR again, I recommend you test your changes by configuring `rust.channel` to both `nightly` and `beta` in your `config.toml`. You can see the latest failure [here](rust-lang#135163 (comment)).
Rollup merge of rust-lang#135253 - pietroalbini:pa-revert-131365, r=Mark-Simulacrum Revert rust-lang#131365 This PR reverts rust-lang#131365, following the revert we did on the beta branches for both 1.84 and 1.85. While the PR passes CI successfully on master, as soon as we branch off beta it starts failing in the newly created beta branch. This caused the release team to revert it for both 1.84 and 1.85, and if nothing is done it would continue being reverted every cycle. `@heiseish` (PR author) feel free to submit the PR again in the future: this revert doesn't represent the release team rejecting your change, but just a (hopefully temporary!) revert to ensure future beta branches can be created without reverting it each time. When submitting the PR again, I recommend you test your changes by configuring `rust.channel` to both `nightly` and `beta` in your `config.toml`. You can see the latest failure [here](rust-lang#135163 (comment)).
…etroalbini Include rustc and rustdoc book in replace-version-placeholder This PR includes the *(stable)* rustc and rustdoc books which might contain `CURRENT_RUSTC_VERSION` that should be replaced when branching beta. Include them so they are not forgotten. I didn't include any other folder or books as they don't strike me as relevant for it and might be problematic in the future if some of the submodules are turned into subtree, because we have places where we wouldn't want to replace them. cf. rust-lang#135163 (comment) cc `@pietroalbini`
Rollup merge of rust-lang#135221 - Urgau:replace-in-stable-book, r=pietroalbini Include rustc and rustdoc book in replace-version-placeholder This PR includes the *(stable)* rustc and rustdoc books which might contain `CURRENT_RUSTC_VERSION` that should be replaced when branching beta. Include them so they are not forgotten. I didn't include any other folder or books as they don't strike me as relevant for it and might be problematic in the future if some of the submodules are turned into subtree, because we have places where we wouldn't want to replace them. cf. rust-lang#135163 (comment) cc `@pietroalbini`
r? @ghost