Skip to content

Issue 5047 reproducer#5048

Open
jan-pesta wants to merge 2 commits into
eclipse-tycho:mainfrom
jan-pesta:issue_5047_reproducer
Open

Issue 5047 reproducer#5048
jan-pesta wants to merge 2 commits into
eclipse-tycho:mainfrom
jan-pesta:issue_5047_reproducer

Conversation

@jan-pesta
Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

@akurtakov
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

This PR looks totally wrong. Please submit only what you have changed/added.

@jan-pesta jan-pesta force-pushed the issue_5047_reproducer branch from af3efb9 to fe1a224 Compare June 10, 2025 06:39
@jan-pesta
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

I just reworked it

@jan-pesta
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

those test failures indikates the issue with versioning. What next is needed here ?

@laeubi
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

laeubi commented Jun 16, 2025

those test failures indikates the issue with versioning

Thanks for the testcase!

What next is needed here ?

Someone needs time to pick this up and provide a fix for it.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown

github-actions Bot commented Jun 16, 2025

Test Results

1 035 files  1 035 suites   5h 37m 37s ⏱️
1 352 tests 1 332 ✅ 20 💤 0 ❌
4 056 runs  3 993 ✅ 63 💤 0 ❌

Results for commit 8e6cd06.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

@jan-pesta
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

I can create fix for it.
I would like to open discussion because this code has been added with #611.
I am not aware why this part of code has been added, because I did not find a reason for such behavior.

I can imagine to keep it backward compatible to restrict fix only if new configuration is specified. e.q.

    @Parameter(name = "stripQualifierIfDuplicates", defaultValue = "true", property = "tycho.buildqualifier.stripduplicatedqualifier")
    protected Boolean stripQualifierIfDuplicates;

@laeubi
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

laeubi commented Jun 16, 2025

My recommendation would be to add a proposed fix to this PR and then we will see if anything fails and then one might understand it better or even notice that it was unnecessary or ... as we currently preparing a new major release also no immediate need for staying backward compatible.

@jan-pesta jan-pesta force-pushed the issue_5047_reproducer branch from f9f4ca1 to b680fc6 Compare June 16, 2025 14:18
@akurtakov
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

This slipped through the cracks. Please sign your ECA and rebase on master.

@jan-pesta jan-pesta force-pushed the issue_5047_reproducer branch from b680fc6 to 8e6cd06 Compare December 4, 2025 10:28
@akurtakov
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@laeubi As you have worked on this one, would you please review it?

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants