You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi there! We've started using dependabot for Rust Async Working Group. However with one of our project restructure in our http server, tide, our experience was brought to halt very quickly hitting a bug that caused dependabot to fail our repo:
It appears dependabot currently validates Cargo manifest by adding dummy code to both lib.rs and main.rs for every crate. This behaviour is different from how cargo handles it, and we ended up hitting into a case where we have examples crate, but it doesn't have a binary (which is disallowed by cargo).
That's definitely a bug in Dependabot. Any recommendations on how we fix it? As you can probably tell, our current approach for fooling Cargo into thinking we have some code is pretty crude (but effective)...!
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs within seven days. Thank you for your contributions.
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs within seven days. Thank you for your contributions.
Hi there! We've started using
dependabot
for Rust Async Working Group. However with one of our project restructure in our http server, tide, our experience was brought to halt very quickly hitting a bug that caused dependabot to fail our repo:https://github.com/rustasync/tide/
Context
Issue here: http-rs/tide#225
It appears
dependabot
currently validates Cargo manifest by adding dummy code to bothlib.rs
andmain.rs
for every crate. This behaviour is different from howcargo
handles it, and we ended up hitting into a case where we haveexamples
crate, but it doesn't have a binary (which is disallowed by cargo).Source of the bug: version_resolver.rb L310-L325
Would be super cool if you could take a look at this soon! Thanks! :)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: