Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Refactor tools/build-mainfest - #58995
Merged
Merged
Conversation
alexcrichton
commented
Mar 8, 2019
Member
We unfortunately don't have a lot of testing for this, so can you confirm you've built and run this locally in simple scenarios to make sure nothing is accidentally broken? Otherwise the refactorings look good to me, thanks! |
Centril
commented
Mar 9, 2019
ContributorAuthor
@alexcrichton Following the instructions in the README seems to give the right structure for things. I reran the instructions on master and compared the diffs which produced no changes. |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
Centrilforce-pushed
the
refactor-build-manifest
branch
from
March 10, 2019 10:19
72b7d0f to
3d4a2efCompareCentrilforce-pushed
the
refactor-build-manifest
branch
2 times, most recently
from
March 10, 2019 10:47
97e0808 to
b74f510CompareCentrilforce-pushed
the
refactor-build-manifest
branch
from
March 10, 2019 10:48
b74f510 to
8353487CompareCentril
commented
Mar 10, 2019
ContributorAuthor
@alexcrichton Rebased; should be good to go now. |
alexcrichton
commented
Mar 11, 2019
Member
@bors: r+ 👍 |
bors
commented
Mar 11, 2019
Collaborator
📌 Commit 8353487 has been approved by |
Centril added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 16, 2019
…alexcrichton Refactor tools/build-mainfest I saw some duplication in rust-lang#58990 and got an itch... Will likely need to be rebased when that lands. Hopefully the PR should have zero semantic changes... r? @alexcrichton
Centril added a commit
to Centril/rust
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 19, 2019
…alexcrichton Refactor tools/build-mainfest I saw some duplication in rust-lang#58990 and got an itch... Will likely need to be rebased when that lands. Hopefully the PR should have zero semantic changes... r? @alexcrichton
bors
commented
Mar 22, 2019
Collaborator
⌛ Testing commit 8353487 with merge 6e2e6db90f96f3c26acff95670af391eda5be10d... |
bors
commented
Mar 22, 2019
Collaborator
💔 Test failed - status-appveyor |
Centril
commented
Mar 22, 2019
ContributorAuthor
@bors retry |
bors
commented
Mar 22, 2019
Collaborator
bors added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 22, 2019
Refactor tools/build-mainfest I saw some duplication in #58990 and got an itch... Will likely need to be rebased when that lands. Hopefully the PR should have zero semantic changes... r? @alexcrichton
bors
commented
Mar 22, 2019
Collaborator
☀️ Test successful - checks-travis, status-appveyor |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I saw some duplication in #58990 and got an itch... Will likely need to be rebased when that lands. Hopefully the PR should have zero semantic changes...
r? @alexcrichton