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

Solve testify dependency conflict #26

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

noamt
Copy link

@noamt noamt commented Jan 23, 2019

At the moment, any consumer using testify via github will fail to resolve the gormigrate library because of a conflict between namespaces.

The testify library's documentation recommends consuming it with the github namespace and chances are that the majority of the consumers do that, rather than through gopk.in
To fix the above I've changed the project's testify dependency to use the github namespace.
After updating, but before building, probably want to run:

go mod tidy

As the caches may be "poisoned" with the wrong namespace.

This fix will likely break compatibility with consumers using gopk.in and will require them to use testify's original namespace as well

…olve the `gormigrate` library because of a conflict between namespaces.

The `testify` library's documentation recommends consuming it with the github namespace and chances are that the majority of the consumers do that, rather than through gopk.in
To fix the above I've changed the project's testify dependency to use the github namespace.
After updating, but before building, probably want to run:
```
go mod tidy
```
As the caches may be "poisoned" with the wrong namespace.

This fix will likely break compatibility with consumers using gopk.in and will require them to use testify's original namespace as well
andreynering added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 26, 2019
- Use testify from github instead of from gopkg.in
- Upgrade Gorm version

Closes #26
Closes #24
@andreynering
Copy link
Contributor

@noamt Thanks for your contribution!

Closed on #27

I did it again in another PR because I noticed in this one we seems to have unrelated indirect dependencies. Something seemed not right...

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.

2 participants