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

Part 3 of RFC2906 - Add support for inheriting license-path, and depednency.path #10538

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 8, 2022

Conversation

Muscraft
Copy link
Member

@Muscraft Muscraft commented Apr 6, 2022

Tracking issue: #8415
RFC: rust-lang/rfcs#2906

Part 1
Part 2

This PR focuses on adding support for inheriting license-path, and depednency.path:

  • To adjust the relative paths from being workspace-relative to package-relative, we use pathdiff which cargo-add is also going to be using for a similar purpose
  • ws_path was added to InheritableFields so we can resolve relative paths from workspace-relative to package-relative
  • Moved resolve for toml dependencies from TomlDependency::<P> to TomlDependency
    • This was done since resolving a relative path should be a string
    • You should never inherit from a .cargo/config.toml which is the reason P was added

Remaining implementation work for the RFC

  • Relative paths for readme
  • Path dependencies infer version directive
  • Lock workspace dependencies and warn when unused
  • Optimizations, as needed
  • Evaluate any new fields for being inheritable (e.g. rust-version)

@rust-highfive
Copy link

r? @ehuss

(rust-highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Apr 6, 2022
@Muscraft
Copy link
Member Author

Muscraft commented Apr 6, 2022

r? @epage

@rust-highfive rust-highfive assigned epage and unassigned ehuss Apr 6, 2022
@Muscraft Muscraft changed the title Part 3 of RFC2906 - Correctly inherit fields and dependencies that are relative paths Part 3 of RFC2906 - Add support for inheriting license-path, and `depednency.path Apr 7, 2022
@Muscraft Muscraft changed the title Part 3 of RFC2906 - Add support for inheriting license-path, and `depednency.path Part 3 of RFC2906 - Add support for inheriting license-path, and depednency.path Apr 7, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@epage epage left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for keeping this going!

src/cargo/core/workspace.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/cargo/core/workspace.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/cargo/core/workspace.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -1021,6 +1022,12 @@ impl<T> MaybeWorkspace<T> {
)),
}
}
fn get_defined(&self) -> CargoResult<&T> {
match self {
MaybeWorkspace::Workspace(_) => Err(anyhow!("MaybeWorkspace was Workspace")),
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: I think I'd just do this as an as_defined(&self) -> Option<&T> and let the error message be completely controlled by the caller

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I could go either way on this. If you feel its better I'll change it to something like this

src/cargo/util/toml/mod.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines 2600 to 2603
if let Some(diff_str) = diff_path.to_str() {
self.path = Some(diff_str.to_owned());
}
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If I'm reading this correctly, we are leaving the incorrect relative path in if it doesn't work?

Wonder if we should have a function shared between the the path rewriting so we can be consistent on error reporting.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You mean something like

pub fn resolve_relative_path(label: &str, root_path: Pathbuf, package_root: PathBuf) -> CargoResult<String> {
    match diff_paths(root_path, package_root) {
        None => Err(anyhow!("`workspace.{}` was defined but could not be resolved with {}", label, package_root.display())),
        Some(path) => Ok(
            path
            .to_str()
            .ok_or_else(|| anyhow!("`{}` resolved to non-UTF value (`{}`)", label, path.display()))?
            .to_owned()
        ),
    }
}

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

  • I'd recommend having old_root, new_root, and rel_path as parameters so it can also handle join + normalize_path for you
  • workspace. doesn't quite work for path dependencies. Maybe just leave it as {label} and re-word to the first to include both paths

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

pub fn resolve_relative_path(
    label: &str,
    old_root: &PathBuf,
    new_root: &PathBuf,
    rel_path: &str,
) -> CargoResult<String> {
    let joined_path = normalize_path(&old_root.join(rel_path));
    match diff_paths(joined_path, new_root) {
        None => Err(anyhow!(
            "`{}` was defined in {} but could not be resolved with {}",
            label,
            old_root.display(),
            package_root.display()
        )),
        Some(path) => Ok(path
            .to_str()
            .ok_or_else(|| {
                anyhow!(
                    "`{}` resolved to non-UTF value (`{}`)",
                    label,
                    path.display()
                )
            })?
            .to_owned()),
    }
}

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Seems like that'd work

fn resolve_path(&mut self, root_path: &Path, package_root: &Path, config: &Config) {
if let Some(from_root) = &self.path {
let resolved = from_root.resolve(config);
if let Some(diff_path) = diff_paths(root_path.join(resolved), package_root) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does diff_paths gracefully handle diffing /foo/bar/../baz with /foo/bee? Do we need to call cargo_utils::paths::normlize_path after doing the join?

I remember having to be particular about that in cargo-add but I don't remember if it was related to diff_paths or other stuff

(maybe another reason for a shared function, see below)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't know if it handles that well or not. I have a feeling that we will need to call cargo_utils::paths::normlize_path as well. I'll change it to this.

"license": null,
"license_file": null,
"license": "MIT",
"license_file": "[..]LICENSE",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I feel like we'll get a better idea if the tests are doing what we expect if they were to use [ROOT] instead of [..]

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'll change it to [ROOT], I agree that it gives a better idea of what is going on

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I tried to do this and it didn't work for some reason. I just changed it for ../LICENSE

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh right, its relative now. Thats what I'm looking for, thanks!

Comment on lines +2267 to +2270
}

impl TomlDependency {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why the new block?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same reasons as for DetailedTomlDependency

src/cargo/core/workspace.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -1645,7 +1646,7 @@ pub struct InheritableFields {
keywords: Option<Vec<String>>,
categories: Option<Vec<String>>,
license: Option<String>,
license_file: Option<String>,
license_file: Option<PathBuf>,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there a reason this was changed or was it left over from the experiment?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It was from the experiment. It was done instead of resolving to a path, converting to a string, and then later converting back to a path. If you like the experiment we can keep it. It's up to you.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Let's go back

Comment on lines 1825 to 1826
new_root: &PathBuf,
abs_path: &PathBuf,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Please take &Path instead of &PathBuf. This will also let you change &package_root.to_path_buf() to packaeg_root

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ill change it to this

@@ -2122,6 +2148,40 @@ impl TomlManifest {
}
}

fn abs_path_for_deps(
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this change also left over from the experiment?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, I thought we were going ahead with that change so all of it is form the experiment

@epage
Copy link
Contributor

epage commented Apr 8, 2022

Thanks!

@bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 8, 2022

📌 Commit 3d07652 has been approved by epage

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Apr 8, 2022
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 8, 2022

⌛ Testing commit 3d07652 with merge b36cc6e...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Apr 8, 2022

☀️ Test successful - checks-actions
Approved by: epage
Pushing b36cc6e to master...

@bors bors merged commit b36cc6e into rust-lang:master Apr 8, 2022
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 8, 2022
Part 4 of RFC2906 - Add support for inheriting `readme`

Tracking issue: #8415
RFC: rust-lang/rfcs#2906

[Part 1](#10497)
[Part 2](#10517)
[Part 3](#10538)

This PR focuses on adding support for inheriting `readme`:
- Added adjusting of a `readme` path when it is outside of the `package_root`
  - Copied from `license-file`'s implementation in `toml::prepare_for_publish()`
- Added copying of a `readme` file when it is outside of the `package_root` for publishing
  - Copied from `license-file`'s implementation in `cargo_package::build_ar_list()`
- Merged copying of a file outside of a `package_root` to reduce duplicated code and allow for other files in the future to be copied in a similar way

Remaining implementation work for the RFC
- Path dependencies infer version directive
- Lock workspace dependencies and warn when unused
- Optimizations, as needed
- Evaluate any new fields for being inheritable (e.g. `rust-version`)
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 13, 2022
Part 5 of RFC2906 - Add support for inheriting `rust-version`

Tracking issue: #8415
RFC: rust-lang/rfcs#2906

Part 1: #10497
Part 2: #10517
Part 3: #10538
Part 4: #10548

This PR focuses on adding support for inheriting `rust-version`. While this was not in the original RFC it was decided that it should be added per [epage's comment](#8415 (comment)).
- Changed `rust-version` to `Option<MaybeWorkspace<String>>` in `TomlProject`
- Added `rust-version` to `TomlWorkspace` to allow for inheritance
- Added `rust-version` to `InheritableFields1 and a method to get it as needed
- Updated tests to include `rust-version`

Remaining implementation work for the RFC
- Switch the inheritance source from `workspace` to `workspace.package`, see [epage's comment](#8415 (comment))
- Add `include` and `exclude` now that `workspace.package` is done, see [epage's comment](#8415 (comment))
- `cargo-add` support, see [epage's comment](#8415 (comment))
- Optimizations, as needed
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 13, 2022
Part 6 of RFC2906 - Switch the inheritance source from `workspace` to…

Tracking issue: #8415
RFC: rust-lang/rfcs#2906

Part 1: #10497
Part 2: #10517
Part 3: #10538
Part 4: #10548
Part 5: #10563

This PR focuses on switching the inheritance source from `workspace` to `workspace.package`. The RFC specified `workspace` but it was decided that it should be changed to `workspace.package` per [epage's comment](#8415 (comment)).
- Moved fields that can be inherited to ` package: Option<InheritableFields>` in `TomlWorkspace`
  - Making `package` `Option<InheritableFields>` was done to remove duplication of types and better signify what fields you can inherit from in one place
- Added `#[serde(skip)]` to `ws_root` and `dependencies` in `InheritableFields` since they will never be present when deserializing and we don't want them present when serializing
- Added a method to update `ws_root` and `dependencies` in `InheritableFields`
  - Added for `ws_root` since it will never be present in a `Cargo.toml` and is needed to resolve relative paths
  - Added for `dependencies` since they are under `workspace.dependencies` not `workspace.package.dependencies`
- `workspace.dependencies` was left out of `workspace.package` to better match `package` and `package.dependencies`
- Updated error messages from `workspace._` to `workspace.package._`
- Updated `unstable.md` to reflect change to `workspace.package`
- Updated tests to use `workspace.package`

Remaining implementation work for the RFC
- Add `include` and `exclude` now that `workspace.package` is done, see [epage's comment](#8415 (comment))
- `cargo-add` support, see [epage's comment](#8415 (comment))
- Optimizations, as needed
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 14, 2022
Part 7 of RFC2906 - Add support for inheriting `exclude` and `include`

Tracking issue: #8415
RFC: rust-lang/rfcs#2906

Part 1: #10497
Part 2: #10517
Part 3: #10538
Part 4: #10548
Part 5: #10563
Part 6: #10564

This PR focuses on adding support for inheriting `include` and `exclude`. While they were not in the original RFC it was decided that they should be added per [epage's comment](#8415 (comment)).
- Changed `include` and `exclude` into `Option<MaybeWorkspace<Vec<String>>>` inside `TomlProject`
- Added `include` and `exclude` to `InheritbaleFields`
- Updated tests to verify `include` and `exclude` are inheriting correctly

Remaining implementation work for the RFC
- `cargo-add` support, see [epage's comment](#8415 (comment))
- Optimizations, as needed
matthiaskrgr added a commit to matthiaskrgr/rust that referenced this pull request Apr 14, 2022
Update cargo

11 commits in e2e2dddebe66dfc1403a312653557e332445308b..dba5baf4345858c591517b24801902a062c399f8
2022-04-05 17:04:53 +0000 to 2022-04-13 21:58:27 +0000
- Part 6 of RFC2906 - Switch the inheritance source from `workspace` to… (rust-lang/cargo#10564)
- Part 5 of RFC2906 - Add support for inheriting `rust-version` (rust-lang/cargo#10563)
- Add support for rustc --check-cfg well known names and values (rust-lang/cargo#10486)
- Reserve filename `Cargo.toml.orig` in `cargo package` (rust-lang/cargo#10551)
- Retry command invocation with argfile (rust-lang/cargo#10546)
- Add a progress indicator for `cargo clean` (rust-lang/cargo#10236)
- Ensure host units don't depend on Docscrape units, fixes rust-lang/cargo#10545 (rust-lang/cargo#10549)
- Fix docs: Bindeps env vars are passed to build script at runtime (rust-lang/cargo#10550)
- Part 4 of RFC2906 - Add support for inheriting `readme` (rust-lang/cargo#10548)
- Part 3 of RFC2906 - Add support for inheriting `license-path`, and `depednency.path` (rust-lang/cargo#10538)
- Bump to 0.63.0, update changelog (rust-lang/cargo#10544)
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Apr 14, 2022
Update cargo

11 commits in e2e2dddebe66dfc1403a312653557e332445308b..dba5baf4345858c591517b24801902a062c399f8
2022-04-05 17:04:53 +0000 to 2022-04-13 21:58:27 +0000
- Part 6 of RFC2906 - Switch the inheritance source from `workspace` to… (rust-lang/cargo#10564)
- Part 5 of RFC2906 - Add support for inheriting `rust-version` (rust-lang/cargo#10563)
- Add support for rustc --check-cfg well known names and values (rust-lang/cargo#10486)
- Reserve filename `Cargo.toml.orig` in `cargo package` (rust-lang/cargo#10551)
- Retry command invocation with argfile (rust-lang/cargo#10546)
- Add a progress indicator for `cargo clean` (rust-lang/cargo#10236)
- Ensure host units don't depend on Docscrape units, fixes rust-lang/cargo#10545 (rust-lang/cargo#10549)
- Fix docs: Bindeps env vars are passed to build script at runtime (rust-lang/cargo#10550)
- Part 4 of RFC2906 - Add support for inheriting `readme` (rust-lang/cargo#10548)
- Part 3 of RFC2906 - Add support for inheriting `license-path`, and `depednency.path` (rust-lang/cargo#10538)
- Bump to 0.63.0, update changelog (rust-lang/cargo#10544)
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 14, 2022
Part 8 of RFC2906 - Keep `InheritableFields` in a `LazyCell` inside `…

Tracking issue: #8415
RFC: rust-lang/rfcs#2906

Part 1: #10497
Part 2: #10517
Part 3: #10538
Part 4: #10548
Part 5: #10563
Part 6: #10564
Part 7: #10565

This PR focuses on optimizations surrounding `InheritabeFields` and searching for a `WorkspaceRootConfig`:
- Keep `InheritableFields` in a `LazyCell` inside `to_real_manifest` so we only search for a workspace root once per `to_real_manifest`
- Changed calls for getting a workspace root to use `inherit_cell.try_borrow_with()`

[Testing Framework](https://gist.github.com/Muscraft/14f6879af27500e34584296edb468d15)
Test Results:
nest=1, runs=7, members=75, step=25
- 25 Members:
  - Optimized: 0.145s
  - Not Optimized: 0.181s
  - Normal: 0.141s
  - Percent change from Normal: 2.837%

- 50 Members
  - Optimized: 0.152s
  - Not Optimized: 0.267s
  - Normal: 0.141s
  - Percent change from Normal: 7.801%

nest=2, runs=7, members=75, step=25
- 25 Members
  - Optimized: 0.147s,
  - Not Optimized: 0.437s
  - Normal: 0.14s
  - Percent change from Normal: 5.0%

- 50 Members
  - Optimized: 0.159s
  - Not Optimized: 1.023s
  - Normal: 0.141s
  - Percent change from Normal: 12.766%

Using a `LazyCell` for `InheritableFields` brought down runtimes to more acceptable levels. It is worth noting that this is a very harsh test case and not one that represents real-world scenarios. That being said there are still some optimizations that could be done if we need to. The biggest one is making sure we only parse a `Cargo.toml` once.

Remaining implementation work for the RFC
- `cargo-add` support, see [epage's comment](#8415 (comment))
- More optimizations, as needed
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 20, 2022
Prefer `key.workspace = true` to `key = { workspace = true }`

Tracking issue: #8415
RFC: rust-lang/rfcs#2906

Part 1: #10497
Part 2: #10517
Part 3: #10538
Part 4: #10548
Part 5: #10563
Part 6: #10564
Part 7: #10565
Part 8: #10568

This PR fell out of [this discussion](#10497 (comment)) regarding if `key.workspace = true` is better than `key = { workspace = true }`.

Changes:
- Made all fields into `field.workspace = true`
- Made dependencies into `dep.workspace = true` when a they only specify `{ workspace = true }`

Remaining implementation work for the RFC
- `cargo-add` support, see [epage's comment](#8415 (comment))
- Optimizations as needed
@ehuss ehuss added this to the 1.62.0 milestone Apr 22, 2022
@Muscraft Muscraft deleted the rfc2906-part3 branch May 27, 2022 01:16
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants