Skip to content

Conversation

@jackkoenig
Copy link
Contributor

This includes porting extra functionality from project/

Contributor Checklist

  • Did you add Scaladoc to every public function/method?
  • Did you add at least one test demonstrating the PR?
  • Did you delete any extraneous printlns/debugging code?
  • Did you specify the type of improvement?
  • Did you add appropriate documentation in docs/src?
  • Did you request a desired merge strategy?
  • Did you add text to be included in the Release Notes for this change?

Type of Improvement

  • Internal or build-related (includes code refactoring/cleanup)

Desired Merge Strategy

  • Squash

Release Notes

Reviewer Checklist (only modified by reviewer)

  • Did you add the appropriate labels? (Select the most appropriate one based on the "Type of Improvement")
  • Did you mark the proper milestone (Bug fix: 3.6.x, 5.x, or 6.x depending on impact, API modification or big change: 7.0)?
  • Did you review?
  • Did you check whether all relevant Contributor checkboxes have been checked?
  • Did you do one of the following when ready to merge:
    • Squash: You/ the contributor Enable auto-merge (squash) and clean up the commit message.
    • Merge: Ensure that contributor has cleaned up their commit history, then merge with Create a merge commit.

@jackkoenig jackkoenig added the Internal Internal change, does not affect users, will be included in release notes label Feb 25, 2025
@jackkoenig jackkoenig added this to the 7.0 milestone Feb 25, 2025
@jackkoenig jackkoenig requested a review from seldridge February 25, 2025 05:12
Comment on lines +1 to +7
// See LICENSE for license details.

package build.docs

import github4s.Github
import github4s.Github._
import github4s.domain.User
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I was hoping git would detect these new .mill files (other than docs/package.mill) as moves with modification from the old .scala files in project/ but it doesn't seem to.

Regardless, these are moves, feel free to review their code but just note they are very much existing code (again, other than docs/package.mill).

@sequencer
Copy link
Member

Ask @unlsycn to take a look at this since you have been helping us on the build system infrastructure, sorry I have been busy with our new uarch designing. Please test if this bumping works in our platform and see if there are anything can be polished?

Comment on lines -94 to 93
run: ./mill -j0 firrtl.cross[].test -oF + svsim.cross[].test -oF + chisel[].test -oF
- name: Binary compatibility
# TODO either make this also check the plugin or decide that we don't
# support binary compatibility for the plugin
run: sbt ++${{ inputs.scala }} unipublish/mimaReportBinaryIssues

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't have a replacement for this yet, there is mill-mdoc which looks like it was upgraded to mill 0.12 but hasn't been published yet--unclear but will try it out later. In nay case, this doesn't actually do anything on main as we don't have prior artifacts yet, so I think it's okay to drop temporarily.

This includes porting extra functionality from project/
@jackkoenig jackkoenig requested a review from unlsycn February 25, 2025 05:35
@unlsycn
Copy link
Contributor

unlsycn commented Feb 26, 2025

Ask @unlsycn to take a look at this since you have been helping us on the build system infrastructure, sorry I have been busy with our new uarch designing. Please test if this bumping works in our platform and see if there are anything can be polished?

LGTM and this PR works fine with t1

@jackkoenig
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks for the review @unlsycn!

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Out of scope for this PR: we should delete this and move to a model where the contributors are handled with a CI flow like https://github.com/chipsalliance/firrtl-spec/blob/main/.github/workflows/update-contributors.yml

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Agreed that is better, will get to it eventually 🙃

@jackkoenig jackkoenig merged commit de5d3e2 into main Feb 26, 2025
15 checks passed
@jackkoenig jackkoenig deleted the jackkoenig/mill-mdoc branch February 26, 2025 16:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Internal Internal change, does not affect users, will be included in release notes

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants