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

luv 1.36.0-0 (new formula) #69321

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

luv 1.36.0-0 (new formula) #69321

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

carlocab
Copy link
Member

  • Have you followed the guidelines for contributing?
  • Have you checked that there aren't other open pull requests for the same formula update/change?
  • Have you built your formula locally with brew install --build-from-source <formula>, where <formula> is the name of the formula you're submitting?
  • Is your test running fine brew test <formula>, where <formula> is the name of the formula you're submitting?
  • Does your build pass brew audit --strict <formula> (after doing brew install <formula>)?

This formula supports #69036 (see also #69319). It could also potentially replace one of neovim's vendored resources.

@carlocab carlocab added the CI-force-arm [DEPRECATED] Don't pass --skip-unbottled-arm to brew test-bot. label Jan 19, 2021
@BrewTestBot BrewTestBot added the new formula PR adds a new formula to Homebrew/homebrew-core label Jan 19, 2021
@carlocab carlocab mentioned this pull request Jan 19, 2021
5 tasks
desc "Bare libuv bindings for lua"
homepage "https://github.com/luvit/luv"
url "https://github.com/luvit/luv/archive/1.36.0-0.tar.gz"
version "1.36.0-0"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not blocking: I wonder if it would be worthwhile to add this version scheme to brew

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are there enough formulae that use it to make it worthwhile?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Guess it might be worthwhile then!

Copy link
Contributor

@SeekingMeaning SeekingMeaning Jan 21, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Question: should the version string 1.36-2 be (1) older than or (2) equal to 1.36.2-0?

Copy link
Member Author

@carlocab carlocab Jan 21, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That is a good question. I don't know. luv seems to never leave it out [1], so it might be moot for this formula. However, it may matter elsewhere. Worse: it might be different for different formulae.

[1] https://github.com/luvit/luv/releases

@BrewTestBot
Copy link
Member

:shipit: @carlocab has triggered a merge.

@carlocab carlocab deleted the luv branch January 20, 2021 06:41
@BrewTestBot BrewTestBot added the outdated PR was locked due to age label Feb 21, 2021
@Homebrew Homebrew locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 21, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
CI-force-arm [DEPRECATED] Don't pass --skip-unbottled-arm to brew test-bot. new formula PR adds a new formula to Homebrew/homebrew-core outdated PR was locked due to age
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants