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

[turbobase64] update to 2023.08 #41748

Draft
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Cheney-W
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes #41724
Use the upstream provided CMakeLists.txt and fix the usage issues

  • Changes comply with the maintainer guide.
  • SHA512s are updated for each updated download.
  • The "supports" clause reflects platforms that may be fixed by this new version.
  • Any fixed CI baseline entries are removed from that file.
  • Any patches that are no longer applied are deleted from the port's directory.
  • The version database is fixed by rerunning ./vcpkg x-add-version --all and committing the result.
  • Only one version is added to each modified port's versions file.

@Cheney-W Cheney-W added info:internal This PR or Issue was filed by the vcpkg team. category:port-update The issue is with a library, which is requesting update new revision category:code-cleanup This PR cleans up code, without fixing any existing bugs nor adding any features. labels Oct 24, 2024
@Cheney-W Cheney-W changed the title Dev/cheney/41724 [turbobase64] update to 2023.08 Oct 24, 2024
@@ -1,11 +1,10 @@
{
"name": "turbobase64",
"version-date": "2020-01-12",
"port-version": 3,
"version-string": "2023.08",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do not use version-string.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

  1. The version field does not support values like 2023.08 and will throw an error.
  2. 2023.08 also does not fall within the scope of the version-semver field.
  3. Since the upstream has already released tags like 2023.08, using version-date would not be appropriate.

This is why I chose to use version-string.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The version field does not support values like 2023.08 and will throw an error.

I know.

2023.08 also does not fall within the scope of the version-semver field.

I know.

Since the upstream has already released tags like 2023.08, using version-date would not be appropriate.

I disagree. Exact version-string is worse than omitting leading zeros in version.

This is not a unique problem. We do have several ports which suffer from point 1. Still, we use version because it allows for >=, and we transform VERSION to the desired tag. Example: poppler.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you very much for your patient guidance.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
category:code-cleanup This PR cleans up code, without fixing any existing bugs nor adding any features. category:port-update The issue is with a library, which is requesting update new revision info:internal This PR or Issue was filed by the vcpkg team.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[turbobase64] update to 2023.08
3 participants