We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
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
As per discussion on #138, the next version is 3.0.0, because newer MiMa and because no more sbt-travisci
I'll start with one or more RCs, which I'll then test in a downstream repo or two.
We've switched from Travis-CI to GitHub Actions in this repo itself, so we're testing that, too.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
tagged 3.0.0-RC1 but it seems I got something wrong, https://github.com/scala/sbt-scala-module/runs/3475141896 has
[info] gpg: error checking usability status of FFFFFFFF [info] gpg: key FFFFFFFF: secret key without public key - skipped [info] gpg: no default secret key: secret key not available [info] gpg: signing failed: secret key not available [error] java.lang.RuntimeException: Failure running 'gpg --batch --passphrase *** --detach-sign --armor --use-agent --output /home/runner/work/sbt-scala-module/sbt-scala-module/target/scala-2.12/sbt-1.0/sbt-scala-module-3.0.0-RC1.pom.asc /home/runner/work/sbt-scala-module/sbt-scala-module/target/scala-2.12/sbt-1.0/sbt-scala-module-3.0.0-RC1.pom'. Exit code: 2
Sorry, something went wrong.
c4a7634 and dcb9208 seem to have fixed it; https://github.com/scala/sbt-scala-module/actions/runs/1186933937 published successfully
now to actually try it out downstream
I tried 3.0.0-RC3 out in some downstream repos and that went fine, so I went ahead and re-released it as 3.0.0
SethTisue
No branches or pull requests
As per discussion on #138, the next version is 3.0.0, because newer MiMa and because no more sbt-travisci
I'll start with one or more RCs, which I'll then test in a downstream repo or two.
We've switched from Travis-CI to GitHub Actions in this repo itself, so we're testing that, too.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: