Skip to content

fix: Remove ref-names from .git_archival.txt #473

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 11, 2024
Merged

fix: Remove ref-names from .git_archival.txt #473

merged 1 commit into from
Apr 11, 2024

Conversation

LecrisUT
Copy link
Collaborator

@LecrisUT LecrisUT commented Apr 11, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Temporary fix for the .git_archival.txt creating archives that change over time

More context about the issue. You can check the results of %D via:

$ git checkout v2.4.0
$ git branch temp
$ git checkout temp
$ git log -1 --format="%D"
HEAD -> temp, tag: v2.4.0, origin/develop, origin/HEAD, develop
$ git commit --allow-empty -m "Any commit"
$ git checkout v2.4.0
$ git log -1 --format="%D"
HEAD, tag: v2.4.0, origin/develop, origin/HEAD, develop

Note how now the branch temp is gone. This is what is happening with develop when a commit is pushed to it.

So far it seems ref-names can be avoided on setuptools_scm when describe works, although ref names seems like quite a good option to have.

@LecrisUT
Remove ref-names from .git_archival.txt
09dc3f6 
Signed-off-by: Cristian Le <cristian.le@mpsd.mpg.de>
@codecov Codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 11, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 83.80%. Comparing base (e6bdd0b) to head (09dc3f6).

Additional details and impacted files 
@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop     #473   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    83.80%   83.80%           
========================================
  Files           25       25           
  Lines         8164     8164           
  Branches      1697     1697           
========================================
  Hits          6842     6842           
  Misses        1322     1322
Flag Coverage Δ
c_api 74.71% <ø> (ø)
fortran_api 56.20% <ø> (ø)
python_api 80.04% <ø> (ø)
unit_tests 13.48% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@LecrisUT LecrisUT added the bug label Apr 11, 2024
@LecrisUT LecrisUT enabled auto-merge (squash) April 11, 2024 18:06
@LecrisUT
Copy link
Collaborator Author

LecrisUT commented Apr 11, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Archive right at the release creation: spglib-2.4.0.tar.gz

node: e6bdd0bafcb60ff26c7ce9ff95d13c43e56d995f
node-date: 2024-04-11T22:12:34+09:00
describe-name: v2.4.0
ref-names: HEAD -> develop, tag: v2.4.0

Archive after this PR: spglib-2.4.0(1).tar.gz

node: e6bdd0bafcb60ff26c7ce9ff95d13c43e56d995f
node-date: 2024-04-11T22:12:34+09:00
describe-name: v2.4.0
ref-names: tag: v2.4.0

@LecrisUT LecrisUT mentioned this pull request Apr 11, 2024
Merged
@LecrisUT LecrisUT merged commit 5c7046b into spglib:develop Apr 11, 2024
@LecrisUT LecrisUT deleted the fix/git-archival branch April 15, 2024 07:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
bug
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
1 participant
@LecrisUT