search

cedar-policy / cedar-java

Java bindings for the Cedar language
https://www.cedarpolicy.com
Apache License 2.0
42 stars 19 forks source link

Don't assume local repo with cedar-policy #45

Closed andrewmwells-amazon closed 1 year ago

andrewmwells-amazon commented 1 year ago

Don't assume local repo with cedar-policy

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

khieta commented 1 year ago

@andrewmwells-amazon I think we want to leave this as-is. I updated it in #43 since the main branch requires the latest version of cedar-policy -- not the version on crates.io. We definitely want the crates.io version in the release/x.x.x branches though.

andrewmwells-amazon commented 1 year ago

@andrewmwells-amazon I think we want to leave this as-is. I updated it in https://github.com/cedar-policy/cedar-java/pull/43 since the main branch requires the latest version of cedar-policy -- not the version on crates.io. We definitely want the crates.io version in the release/x.x.x branches though.

I see. Not ideal, but probably ok for now. It breaks cedar-java-hello-world, but I think it's reasonable for that to depend on a release instead of main. Added a comment and we can fix it after the next cedar-policy release.

khieta commented 1 year ago

I see. Not ideal, but probably ok for now. It breaks cedar-java-hello-world, but I think it's reasonable for that to depend on a release instead of main. Added a comment and we can fix it after the next cedar-policy release.

We may run into this situation again in the future (un-released breaking changes on the main branch in cedar) so there may not be a great fix. I think we just want to redirect all users to the release branches (and the released version on Maven, once available).

But this is a bit of a foot gun currently: should we switch to using release/2.3.x as the default branch, and rename main to experimental?