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

3.4.0-RC2 Release procedure #19487

Closed
15 tasks done
Kordyjan opened this issue Jan 19, 2024 · 16 comments
Closed
15 tasks done

3.4.0-RC2 Release procedure #19487

Kordyjan opened this issue Jan 19, 2024 · 16 comments
Assignees
Labels
itype:meta Issues about process/similar

Comments

@Kordyjan
Copy link
Contributor

Kordyjan commented Jan 19, 2024

  • Publish 3.4.0-RC2 artifacts to Maven via CI
    • On release-3.4.0 branch:
      • In changelogs add file with a changelog
      • In Build.scala: Set baseVersion to 3.4.0-RC2
      • In Build.scala: Set previousDottyVersion to 3.4.0-RC1
      • Tag the branch as 3.4.0-RC2
      • Build
  • Wait for confirmation from tooling:
  • Announce the releases
@Kordyjan Kordyjan added the itype:meta Issues about process/similar label Jan 19, 2024
@Kordyjan Kordyjan self-assigned this Jan 19, 2024
@nicolasstucki
Copy link
Contributor

It seems we are releasing 3.4.0-RC2 with the experimental tag 1 https://github.com/lampepfl/dotty/blob/6dfb1b5eee1fc46fb9bdc1efd49ce359c09778bc/tasty/src/dotty/tools/tasty/TastyFormat.scala#L337

This does not seem to align with #19321 (comment). This seems to indicate we need experimental tag 2 for this release. @bishabosha did I interpret this correctly?

@Kordyjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

If I'm not mistaken, there are no tasty format changes between RC1 and RC2, so there is no need to bump the experimental version.

@nicolasstucki
Copy link
Contributor

The concern is that 3.4.0-RC1 had the wrong TASTy experimental version. And this one should have the same one. This is not critical, but it would imply that we will only be able to use 3.4.0 as a reference compiler and not 3.4.0-RC2.

@Kordyjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes, that's true, but I cannot see why 28.4-2 instead of 28.4-1 would make any difference, as the tasty version on nightly should be 28.5-1, which is incompatible with both of them.

@nicolasstucki
Copy link
Contributor

We could have an extra rule in the version checks to allow -2 in this situation. Not sure what was the original plan with that version.

@Kordyjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ok, I get what you mean. -2 in RCs of minors was something that was dropped sometime between September 2021 and March 2022. I don't remember why. As far as I remember, RCs for 3.1.0 were the last time something had a tasty version ending with -2.

@Kordyjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Kordyjan commented Jan 19, 2024

It may have been somehow related to the planned and later scrapped --scala-output-version, which was being developed around that time. I'm ok with bringing back -2 versions before 3.5.0.

@bishabosha
Copy link
Member

bishabosha commented Jan 19, 2024

the -2 would only be significant if we want to break compatibility between 3.3.x nightlies and 3.4.0-RC2, which is a noble goal but maybe not critical, the important thing is staying behind 28.4-0

@Kordyjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Artifacts for 3.4.0-RC2 are on maven central.

@tgodzik
Copy link
Contributor

tgodzik commented Jan 20, 2024

Works with Metals 🎉

@nicolasstucki
Copy link
Contributor

An issue was found with the definitions of scala.language.`3.5` in #19503.

@Kordyjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Kordyjan commented Jan 22, 2024

An issue was found with the definitions of scala.language.`3.5` in #19503.

I must admit that I thought that scala.language.`3.5` should only be added in 3.5.0, and before that, things that will no longer work in 3.5 are marked as not working in scala.language.future.

@nicolasstucki
Copy link
Contributor

nicolasstucki commented Jan 22, 2024

I must admit that I thought that scala.language.3.5 should only be added in 3.5.0, ...

That might be the case. The most inportant part is to be consitent with 3.4.X patch releases (or nightlies).

@Kordyjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Somehow, I haven't thought about it as already merged to the main. Indeed, if it is intended to be released in 3.4.1, we need this symbol in 3.4.0.

@Kordyjan
Copy link
Contributor Author

I started the process for 3.4.0-RC3:
#19517

@adpi2
Copy link
Member

adpi2 commented Jan 23, 2024

I am done with the release of DAP for 3.4.0-RC2: https://repo1.maven.org/maven2/ch/epfl/scala/scala-expression-compiler_3.4.0-RC2/

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
itype:meta Issues about process/similar
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants