Skip to content

Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage - #2424

Closed
tnull wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom
tnull:2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
Closed

Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage#2424
tnull wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom
tnull:2023-07-pin-proc-macro2

Conversation

@tnull

@tnulltnull commented Jul 17, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

The proc-macro2 crate switched to Rust edition 2021 starting with v1.0.66, i.e., has MSRV of 1.56.

Here, we pin it in CI to fix the breakage.

@tnulltnull mentioned this pull request Jul 17, 2023
Merged
TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt reviewed Jul 17, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadci/ci-tests.sh Outdated
@tnull
tnullforce-pushed the 2023-07-pin-proc-macro2 branch 2 times, most recently from 19d8ec9 to b512afaCompareJuly 17, 2023 19:13
@TheBlueMatt

TheBlueMatt commented Jul 17, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Also, this is a pretty big dep tree just for tokio::select!() on one line, especially when we already have a two-select implemented in lightning-background-processor. I wonder if we shouldn't just copy that into lightning-net-tokio.

@tnull
tnullforce-pushed the 2023-07-pin-proc-macro2 branch from b512afa to 6ff1100CompareJuly 17, 2023 19:26
@tnull

tnull commented Jul 17, 2023•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Also, this is a pretty big dep tree just for tokio::select!() on one line, especially when we already have a two-select implemented in lightning-background-processor. I wonder if we shouldn't just copy that into lightning-net-tokio.

Yeah, maybe. On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways, which would not only spare us to copy and maintain more code, but also would allow us to remove a lot (if not all) of the CI pins. Will go through what exactly our requirements are in the coming days to hopefully arrive at a sane target.

@tnull
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage
61d7ada
The proc-macro2 crate switched to Rust edition 2021 starting with
v1.0.66, i.e., has MSRV of 1.56.
Here, we pin it in CI to fix the breakage.
@tnull
tnullforce-pushed the 2023-07-pin-proc-macro2 branch from 6ff1100 to 61d7adaCompareJuly 17, 2023 19:32
@TheBlueMatt

TheBlueMatt commented Jul 17, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways

I'm not sure why - the furthest we could realistically go is 1.63, and sadly there's really just not much interesting between 1.48 and 1.63...we'll probably have some other sub-crates with MSRVs of 1.63, but there's no reason to rush ahead and bump the MSRV of the other crates for some time, I think.

@tnull

tnull commented Jul 17, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways

I'm not sure why - the furthest we could realistically go is 1.63, and sadly there's really just not much interesting between 1.48 and 1.63...we'll probably have some other sub-crates with MSRVs of 1.63, but there's no reason to rush ahead and bump the MSRV of the other crates for some time, I think.

Well, the transaction-sync crate MSRV should lie somewhere around ~1.56/1.57 with TLS currently? So, while it won't protect us from future MSRV bumps longer term, it would allow us to get started, until we can move to a saner dependecy tree there. IIRC, this 'two-pronged' approach was what we arrived at?

@TheBlueMatt

TheBlueMatt commented Jul 17, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Well, the transaction-sync crate MSRV should lie somewhere around ~1.56/1.57 with TLS currently?

Right, but there's no reason that has to imply a workspace-wide MSRV bump, the rest of the workspace can still happily sit at 1.48.

@TheBlueMatt

TheBlueMatt commented Jul 17, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

I think we should copy the one from lightning-background-processor - its like 15 LoC (would become 20 with return elements, maybe) and removes several crates from our dependency tree.

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt added this to the 0.0.116 milestone Jul 17, 2023
@dunxen

dunxen commented Jul 17, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I feel like dropping the dependency is ideal here, but also happy with a temporary pin.

@tnull

tnull commented Jul 17, 2023•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

I feel like dropping the dependency is ideal here, but also happy with a temporary pin.

Yeah, we probably should. Will pick it up tomorrow, if @TheBlueMatt doesn't beat me to it. Closing this for now.

@tnulltnull closed this Jul 17, 2023
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt mentioned this pull request Jul 17, 2023
Merged
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMattTheBlueMatt left review comments

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

0.0.116

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@tnull@TheBlueMatt@dunxen
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all 
 blocks
(function() {
function addCopyButtons() {
document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.textContent = 'Copy';
btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';
btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
btn.onclick = function() {
navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
});
};
codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
});
}
addCopyButtons();
// Re-run on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Pin `proc-macro2` in CI to fix MSRV breakage by tnull · Pull Request #2424 · lightningdevkit/rust-lightning · GitHub
Skip to content
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage - #2424
Closed
tnull wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
tnull:2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
Closed
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage#2424
tnull wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
tnull:2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
Conversation
@tnull
@tnulltnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
The proc-macro2 crate switched to Rust edition 2021 starting with v1.0.66, i.e., has MSRV of 1.56.
Here, we pin it in CI to fix the breakage.
@tnulltnull
mentioned this pull request
Jul 17, 2023
 Merged

TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
reviewed
Jul 17, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadci/ci-tests.sh
Outdated

@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
2 times, most recently
from
19d8ec9 to
b512afaCompareJuly 17, 2023 19:13
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Also, this is a pretty big dep tree just for tokio::select!() on one line, especially when we already have a two-select implemented in lightning-background-processor. I wonder if we shouldn't just copy that into lightning-net-tokio.
@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
from
b512afa to
6ff1100CompareJuly 17, 2023 19:26
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Also, this is a pretty big dep tree just for tokio::select!() on one line, especially when we already have a two-select implemented in lightning-background-processor. I wonder if we shouldn't just copy that into lightning-net-tokio.
Yeah, maybe. On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways, which would not only spare us to copy and maintain more code, but also would allow us to remove a lot (if not all) of the CI pins. Will go through what exactly our requirements are in the coming days to hopefully arrive at a sane target.
@tnull
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage
61d7ada
The proc-macro2 crate switched to Rust edition 2021 starting with
v1.0.66, i.e., has MSRV of 1.56.
Here, we pin it in CI to fix the breakage.
@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
from
6ff1100 to
61d7adaCompareJuly 17, 2023 19:32
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways
I'm not sure why - the furthest we could realistically go is 1.63, and sadly there's really just not much interesting between 1.48 and 1.63...we'll probably have some other sub-crates with MSRVs of 1.63, but there's no reason to rush ahead and bump the MSRV of the other crates for some time, I think.
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways
I'm not sure why - the furthest we could realistically go is 1.63, and sadly there's really just not much interesting between 1.48 and 1.63...we'll probably have some other sub-crates with MSRVs of 1.63, but there's no reason to rush ahead and bump the MSRV of the other crates for some time, I think.
Well, the transaction-sync crate MSRV should lie somewhere around ~1.56/1.57 with TLS currently? So, while it won't protect us from future MSRV bumps longer term, it would allow us to get started, until we can move to a saner dependecy tree there. IIRC, this 'two-pronged' approach was what we arrived at?
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Well, the transaction-sync crate MSRV should lie somewhere around ~1.56/1.57 with TLS currently?
Right, but there's no reason that has to imply a workspace-wide MSRV bump, the rest of the workspace can still happily sit at 1.48.
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
I think we should copy the one from lightning-background-processor - its like 15 LoC (would become 20 with return elements, maybe) and removes several crates from our dependency tree.
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
added this to the 0.0.116 milestone
Jul 17, 2023
@dunxen
dunxen
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
I feel like dropping the dependency is ideal here, but also happy with a temporary pin.
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
I feel like dropping the dependency is ideal here, but also happy with a temporary pin.
Yeah, we probably should. Will pick it up tomorrow, if @TheBlueMatt doesn't beat me to it. Closing this for now.
@tnulltnull
closed this
Jul 17, 2023
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
mentioned this pull request
Jul 17, 2023
 Merged

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMattTheBlueMatt left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone

0.0.116

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@tnull@TheBlueMatt@dunxen

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode
(function() {
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '
.markdown-body {
color-scheme: dark light;
}
.markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }
.markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }
.markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }
.markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }
.markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }
.markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }
';
document.head.appendChild(style);
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Pin `proc-macro2` in CI to fix MSRV breakage by tnull · Pull Request #2424 · lightningdevkit/rust-lightning · GitHub
Skip to content
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage - #2424
Closed
tnull wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
tnull:2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
Closed
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage#2424
tnull wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
tnull:2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
Conversation
@tnull
@tnulltnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
The proc-macro2 crate switched to Rust edition 2021 starting with v1.0.66, i.e., has MSRV of 1.56.
Here, we pin it in CI to fix the breakage.
@tnulltnull
mentioned this pull request
Jul 17, 2023
 Merged

TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
reviewed
Jul 17, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadci/ci-tests.sh
Outdated

@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
2 times, most recently
from
19d8ec9 to
b512afaCompareJuly 17, 2023 19:13
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Also, this is a pretty big dep tree just for tokio::select!() on one line, especially when we already have a two-select implemented in lightning-background-processor. I wonder if we shouldn't just copy that into lightning-net-tokio.
@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
from
b512afa to
6ff1100CompareJuly 17, 2023 19:26
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Also, this is a pretty big dep tree just for tokio::select!() on one line, especially when we already have a two-select implemented in lightning-background-processor. I wonder if we shouldn't just copy that into lightning-net-tokio.
Yeah, maybe. On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways, which would not only spare us to copy and maintain more code, but also would allow us to remove a lot (if not all) of the CI pins. Will go through what exactly our requirements are in the coming days to hopefully arrive at a sane target.
@tnull
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage
61d7ada
The proc-macro2 crate switched to Rust edition 2021 starting with
v1.0.66, i.e., has MSRV of 1.56.
Here, we pin it in CI to fix the breakage.
@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
from
6ff1100 to
61d7adaCompareJuly 17, 2023 19:32
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways
I'm not sure why - the furthest we could realistically go is 1.63, and sadly there's really just not much interesting between 1.48 and 1.63...we'll probably have some other sub-crates with MSRVs of 1.63, but there's no reason to rush ahead and bump the MSRV of the other crates for some time, I think.
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways
I'm not sure why - the furthest we could realistically go is 1.63, and sadly there's really just not much interesting between 1.48 and 1.63...we'll probably have some other sub-crates with MSRVs of 1.63, but there's no reason to rush ahead and bump the MSRV of the other crates for some time, I think.
Well, the transaction-sync crate MSRV should lie somewhere around ~1.56/1.57 with TLS currently? So, while it won't protect us from future MSRV bumps longer term, it would allow us to get started, until we can move to a saner dependecy tree there. IIRC, this 'two-pronged' approach was what we arrived at?
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Well, the transaction-sync crate MSRV should lie somewhere around ~1.56/1.57 with TLS currently?
Right, but there's no reason that has to imply a workspace-wide MSRV bump, the rest of the workspace can still happily sit at 1.48.
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
I think we should copy the one from lightning-background-processor - its like 15 LoC (would become 20 with return elements, maybe) and removes several crates from our dependency tree.
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
added this to the 0.0.116 milestone
Jul 17, 2023
@dunxen
dunxen
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
I feel like dropping the dependency is ideal here, but also happy with a temporary pin.
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
I feel like dropping the dependency is ideal here, but also happy with a temporary pin.
Yeah, we probably should. Will pick it up tomorrow, if @TheBlueMatt doesn't beat me to it. Closing this for now.
@tnulltnull
closed this
Jul 17, 2023
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
mentioned this pull request
Jul 17, 2023
 Merged

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMattTheBlueMatt left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone

0.0.116

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@tnull@TheBlueMatt@dunxen

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer
(function() {
var ref = document.referrer;
var terms = [];
if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {
var url = new URL(ref);
var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');
if (q) {
terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });
}
}
if (terms.length === 0) return;
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';
document.head.appendChild(style);
function highlight(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node
var text = node.textContent;
var found = false;
terms.forEach(function(term) {
var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi');
if (regex.test(text)) {
found = true;
var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
var parts = text.split(regex);
parts.forEach(function(part, i) {
if (i % 2 === 0) {
frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));
} else {
var span = document.createElement('span');
span.className = 'userscript-highlight';
span.textContent = part;
frag.appendChild(span);
}
});
node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);
}
});
} else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element
var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];
if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {
Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);
}
}
}
highlight(document.body);
// Re-highlight on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Pin `proc-macro2` in CI to fix MSRV breakage by tnull · Pull Request #2424 · lightningdevkit/rust-lightning · GitHub
Skip to content
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage - #2424
Closed
tnull wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
tnull:2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
Closed
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage#2424
tnull wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
tnull:2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
Conversation
@tnull
@tnulltnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
The proc-macro2 crate switched to Rust edition 2021 starting with v1.0.66, i.e., has MSRV of 1.56.
Here, we pin it in CI to fix the breakage.
@tnulltnull
mentioned this pull request
Jul 17, 2023
 Merged

TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
reviewed
Jul 17, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadci/ci-tests.sh
Outdated

@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
2 times, most recently
from
19d8ec9 to
b512afaCompareJuly 17, 2023 19:13
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Also, this is a pretty big dep tree just for tokio::select!() on one line, especially when we already have a two-select implemented in lightning-background-processor. I wonder if we shouldn't just copy that into lightning-net-tokio.
@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
from
b512afa to
6ff1100CompareJuly 17, 2023 19:26
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Also, this is a pretty big dep tree just for tokio::select!() on one line, especially when we already have a two-select implemented in lightning-background-processor. I wonder if we shouldn't just copy that into lightning-net-tokio.
Yeah, maybe. On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways, which would not only spare us to copy and maintain more code, but also would allow us to remove a lot (if not all) of the CI pins. Will go through what exactly our requirements are in the coming days to hopefully arrive at a sane target.
@tnull
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage
61d7ada
The proc-macro2 crate switched to Rust edition 2021 starting with
v1.0.66, i.e., has MSRV of 1.56.
Here, we pin it in CI to fix the breakage.
@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
from
6ff1100 to
61d7adaCompareJuly 17, 2023 19:32
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways
I'm not sure why - the furthest we could realistically go is 1.63, and sadly there's really just not much interesting between 1.48 and 1.63...we'll probably have some other sub-crates with MSRVs of 1.63, but there's no reason to rush ahead and bump the MSRV of the other crates for some time, I think.
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways
I'm not sure why - the furthest we could realistically go is 1.63, and sadly there's really just not much interesting between 1.48 and 1.63...we'll probably have some other sub-crates with MSRVs of 1.63, but there's no reason to rush ahead and bump the MSRV of the other crates for some time, I think.
Well, the transaction-sync crate MSRV should lie somewhere around ~1.56/1.57 with TLS currently? So, while it won't protect us from future MSRV bumps longer term, it would allow us to get started, until we can move to a saner dependecy tree there. IIRC, this 'two-pronged' approach was what we arrived at?
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Well, the transaction-sync crate MSRV should lie somewhere around ~1.56/1.57 with TLS currently?
Right, but there's no reason that has to imply a workspace-wide MSRV bump, the rest of the workspace can still happily sit at 1.48.
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
I think we should copy the one from lightning-background-processor - its like 15 LoC (would become 20 with return elements, maybe) and removes several crates from our dependency tree.
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
added this to the 0.0.116 milestone
Jul 17, 2023
@dunxen
dunxen
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
I feel like dropping the dependency is ideal here, but also happy with a temporary pin.
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
I feel like dropping the dependency is ideal here, but also happy with a temporary pin.
Yeah, we probably should. Will pick it up tomorrow, if @TheBlueMatt doesn't beat me to it. Closing this for now.
@tnulltnull
closed this
Jul 17, 2023
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
mentioned this pull request
Jul 17, 2023
 Merged

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMattTheBlueMatt left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone

0.0.116

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@tnull@TheBlueMatt@dunxen

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page
(function() {
var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',
'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',
'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];
function cleanUrl(url) {
try {
var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);
var changed = false;
trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {
if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {
u.searchParams.delete(p);
changed = true;
}
});
return changed ? u.toString() : url;
} catch (e) {
return url;
}
}
function cleanLinks() {
document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
cleanLinks();
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1) {
if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();
node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Pin `proc-macro2` in CI to fix MSRV breakage by tnull · Pull Request #2424 · lightningdevkit/rust-lightning · GitHub
Skip to content
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage - #2424
Closed
tnull wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
tnull:2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
Closed
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage#2424
tnull wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
tnull:2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
Conversation
@tnull
@tnulltnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
The proc-macro2 crate switched to Rust edition 2021 starting with v1.0.66, i.e., has MSRV of 1.56.
Here, we pin it in CI to fix the breakage.
@tnulltnull
mentioned this pull request
Jul 17, 2023
 Merged

TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
reviewed
Jul 17, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadci/ci-tests.sh
Outdated

@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
2 times, most recently
from
19d8ec9 to
b512afaCompareJuly 17, 2023 19:13
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Also, this is a pretty big dep tree just for tokio::select!() on one line, especially when we already have a two-select implemented in lightning-background-processor. I wonder if we shouldn't just copy that into lightning-net-tokio.
@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
from
b512afa to
6ff1100CompareJuly 17, 2023 19:26
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Also, this is a pretty big dep tree just for tokio::select!() on one line, especially when we already have a two-select implemented in lightning-background-processor. I wonder if we shouldn't just copy that into lightning-net-tokio.
Yeah, maybe. On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways, which would not only spare us to copy and maintain more code, but also would allow us to remove a lot (if not all) of the CI pins. Will go through what exactly our requirements are in the coming days to hopefully arrive at a sane target.
@tnull
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage
61d7ada
The proc-macro2 crate switched to Rust edition 2021 starting with
v1.0.66, i.e., has MSRV of 1.56.
Here, we pin it in CI to fix the breakage.
@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
from
6ff1100 to
61d7adaCompareJuly 17, 2023 19:32
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways
I'm not sure why - the furthest we could realistically go is 1.63, and sadly there's really just not much interesting between 1.48 and 1.63...we'll probably have some other sub-crates with MSRVs of 1.63, but there's no reason to rush ahead and bump the MSRV of the other crates for some time, I think.
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways
I'm not sure why - the furthest we could realistically go is 1.63, and sadly there's really just not much interesting between 1.48 and 1.63...we'll probably have some other sub-crates with MSRVs of 1.63, but there's no reason to rush ahead and bump the MSRV of the other crates for some time, I think.
Well, the transaction-sync crate MSRV should lie somewhere around ~1.56/1.57 with TLS currently? So, while it won't protect us from future MSRV bumps longer term, it would allow us to get started, until we can move to a saner dependecy tree there. IIRC, this 'two-pronged' approach was what we arrived at?
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Well, the transaction-sync crate MSRV should lie somewhere around ~1.56/1.57 with TLS currently?
Right, but there's no reason that has to imply a workspace-wide MSRV bump, the rest of the workspace can still happily sit at 1.48.
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
I think we should copy the one from lightning-background-processor - its like 15 LoC (would become 20 with return elements, maybe) and removes several crates from our dependency tree.
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
added this to the 0.0.116 milestone
Jul 17, 2023
@dunxen
dunxen
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
I feel like dropping the dependency is ideal here, but also happy with a temporary pin.
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
I feel like dropping the dependency is ideal here, but also happy with a temporary pin.
Yeah, we probably should. Will pick it up tomorrow, if @TheBlueMatt doesn't beat me to it. Closing this for now.
@tnulltnull
closed this
Jul 17, 2023
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
mentioned this pull request
Jul 17, 2023
 Merged

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMattTheBlueMatt left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone

0.0.116

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@tnull@TheBlueMatt@dunxen

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube
(function() {
function tryTheater() {
var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]');
if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {
btn.click();
}
}
// Try immediately
tryTheater();
// Try after navigation (SPA)
var lastUrl = location.href;
setInterval(function() {
if (location.href !== lastUrl) {
lastUrl = location.href;
setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);
}
}, 1000);
// Also try on player load
var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Pin `proc-macro2` in CI to fix MSRV breakage by tnull · Pull Request #2424 · lightningdevkit/rust-lightning · GitHub
Skip to content
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage - #2424
Closed
tnull wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
tnull:2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
Closed
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage#2424
tnull wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
tnull:2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
Conversation
@tnull
@tnulltnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
The proc-macro2 crate switched to Rust edition 2021 starting with v1.0.66, i.e., has MSRV of 1.56.
Here, we pin it in CI to fix the breakage.
@tnulltnull
mentioned this pull request
Jul 17, 2023
 Merged

TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
reviewed
Jul 17, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadci/ci-tests.sh
Outdated

@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
2 times, most recently
from
19d8ec9 to
b512afaCompareJuly 17, 2023 19:13
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Also, this is a pretty big dep tree just for tokio::select!() on one line, especially when we already have a two-select implemented in lightning-background-processor. I wonder if we shouldn't just copy that into lightning-net-tokio.
@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
from
b512afa to
6ff1100CompareJuly 17, 2023 19:26
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Also, this is a pretty big dep tree just for tokio::select!() on one line, especially when we already have a two-select implemented in lightning-background-processor. I wonder if we shouldn't just copy that into lightning-net-tokio.
Yeah, maybe. On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways, which would not only spare us to copy and maintain more code, but also would allow us to remove a lot (if not all) of the CI pins. Will go through what exactly our requirements are in the coming days to hopefully arrive at a sane target.
@tnull
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage
61d7ada
The proc-macro2 crate switched to Rust edition 2021 starting with
v1.0.66, i.e., has MSRV of 1.56.
Here, we pin it in CI to fix the breakage.
@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
from
6ff1100 to
61d7adaCompareJuly 17, 2023 19:32
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways
I'm not sure why - the furthest we could realistically go is 1.63, and sadly there's really just not much interesting between 1.48 and 1.63...we'll probably have some other sub-crates with MSRVs of 1.63, but there's no reason to rush ahead and bump the MSRV of the other crates for some time, I think.
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways
I'm not sure why - the furthest we could realistically go is 1.63, and sadly there's really just not much interesting between 1.48 and 1.63...we'll probably have some other sub-crates with MSRVs of 1.63, but there's no reason to rush ahead and bump the MSRV of the other crates for some time, I think.
Well, the transaction-sync crate MSRV should lie somewhere around ~1.56/1.57 with TLS currently? So, while it won't protect us from future MSRV bumps longer term, it would allow us to get started, until we can move to a saner dependecy tree there. IIRC, this 'two-pronged' approach was what we arrived at?
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Well, the transaction-sync crate MSRV should lie somewhere around ~1.56/1.57 with TLS currently?
Right, but there's no reason that has to imply a workspace-wide MSRV bump, the rest of the workspace can still happily sit at 1.48.
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
I think we should copy the one from lightning-background-processor - its like 15 LoC (would become 20 with return elements, maybe) and removes several crates from our dependency tree.
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
added this to the 0.0.116 milestone
Jul 17, 2023
@dunxen
dunxen
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
I feel like dropping the dependency is ideal here, but also happy with a temporary pin.
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
I feel like dropping the dependency is ideal here, but also happy with a temporary pin.
Yeah, we probably should. Will pick it up tomorrow, if @TheBlueMatt doesn't beat me to it. Closing this for now.
@tnulltnull
closed this
Jul 17, 2023
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
mentioned this pull request
Jul 17, 2023
 Merged

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMattTheBlueMatt left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone

0.0.116

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@tnull@TheBlueMatt@dunxen

, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content
(function() {
function unstick() {
document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) {
if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {
el.style.position = 'static';
el.style.top = 'auto';
el.style.zIndex = 'auto';
}
});
}
unstick();
var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
})();
Pin `proc-macro2` in CI to fix MSRV breakage by tnull · Pull Request #2424 · lightningdevkit/rust-lightning · GitHub
Skip to content
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage - #2424
Closed
tnull wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
tnull:2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
Closed
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage#2424
tnull wants to merge 1 commit into
lightningdevkit:mainfrom 
tnull:2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
Conversation
@tnull
@tnulltnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
The proc-macro2 crate switched to Rust edition 2021 starting with v1.0.66, i.e., has MSRV of 1.56.
Here, we pin it in CI to fix the breakage.
@tnulltnull
mentioned this pull request
Jul 17, 2023
 Merged

TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
reviewed
Jul 17, 2023
View reviewed changes
Comment threadci/ci-tests.sh
Outdated

@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
2 times, most recently
from
19d8ec9 to
b512afaCompareJuly 17, 2023 19:13
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Also, this is a pretty big dep tree just for tokio::select!() on one line, especially when we already have a two-select implemented in lightning-background-processor. I wonder if we shouldn't just copy that into lightning-net-tokio.
@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
from
b512afa to
6ff1100CompareJuly 17, 2023 19:26
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Also, this is a pretty big dep tree just for tokio::select!() on one line, especially when we already have a two-select implemented in lightning-background-processor. I wonder if we shouldn't just copy that into lightning-net-tokio.
Yeah, maybe. On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways, which would not only spare us to copy and maintain more code, but also would allow us to remove a lot (if not all) of the CI pins. Will go through what exactly our requirements are in the coming days to hopefully arrive at a sane target.
@tnull
Pin proc-macro2 in CI to fix MSRV breakage
61d7ada
The proc-macro2 crate switched to Rust edition 2021 starting with
v1.0.66, i.e., has MSRV of 1.56.
Here, we pin it in CI to fix the breakage.
@tnull
tnullforce-pushed
the
2023-07-pin-proc-macro2
branch
from
6ff1100 to
61d7adaCompareJuly 17, 2023 19:32
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways
I'm not sure why - the furthest we could realistically go is 1.63, and sadly there's really just not much interesting between 1.48 and 1.63...we'll probably have some other sub-crates with MSRVs of 1.63, but there's no reason to rush ahead and bump the MSRV of the other crates for some time, I think.
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
On the other hand, as discussed recently, a slight MSRV bump might be useful/imminent anyways
I'm not sure why - the furthest we could realistically go is 1.63, and sadly there's really just not much interesting between 1.48 and 1.63...we'll probably have some other sub-crates with MSRVs of 1.63, but there's no reason to rush ahead and bump the MSRV of the other crates for some time, I think.
Well, the transaction-sync crate MSRV should lie somewhere around ~1.56/1.57 with TLS currently? So, while it won't protect us from future MSRV bumps longer term, it would allow us to get started, until we can move to a saner dependecy tree there. IIRC, this 'two-pronged' approach was what we arrived at?
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
Well, the transaction-sync crate MSRV should lie somewhere around ~1.56/1.57 with TLS currently?
Right, but there's no reason that has to imply a workspace-wide MSRV bump, the rest of the workspace can still happily sit at 1.48.
@TheBlueMatt
TheBlueMatt
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Collaborator
I think we should copy the one from lightning-background-processor - its like 15 LoC (would become 20 with return elements, maybe) and removes several crates from our dependency tree.
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
added this to the 0.0.116 milestone
Jul 17, 2023
@dunxen
dunxen
commented
Jul 17, 2023

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
I feel like dropping the dependency is ideal here, but also happy with a temporary pin.
@tnull
tnull
commented
Jul 17, 2023•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
I feel like dropping the dependency is ideal here, but also happy with a temporary pin.
Yeah, we probably should. Will pick it up tomorrow, if @TheBlueMatt doesn't beat me to it. Closing this for now.
@tnulltnull
closed this
Jul 17, 2023
@TheBlueMattTheBlueMatt
mentioned this pull request
Jul 17, 2023
 Merged

Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@TheBlueMattTheBlueMattTheBlueMatt left review comments

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels


None yet


Projects


None yet


Milestone

0.0.116

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@tnull@TheBlueMatt@dunxen