Closed havocp closed 10 years ago
@havocp RE: Github creds - ZOMG! I was kidding. RE: everything else Wow, I am grateful for all this work. Will review
Other than my one comment, LGTM. Oh, and it passes locally as well:
[info] --- Integration Test Report ---
[info] * com.typesafe.sbtrc.it.execution.TestExecution [ PASSED ]
[info] * com.typesafe.sbtrc.it.loading.CanCancelTasks [ PASSED ]
[info] * com.typesafe.sbtrc.it.loading.CanKillServer [ PASSED ]
[info] * com.typesafe.sbtrc.it.loading.CanLoadSimpleProject [ PASSED ]
[info] * com.typesafe.sbtrc.it.loading.CanUseUiInteractionPlugin [ PASSED ]
[success] Total time: 104 s, completed Sep 9, 2014 10:33:27 PM
> project server-0-13
[info] Set current project to server-0-13 (in build file:/home/jim/typesafe/sbt-remote-control/)
> test
[info] Formatting 4 Scala sources {file:/home/jim/typesafe/sbt-remote-control/}server-0-13(test) ...
[info] Compiling 4 Scala sources to /home/jim/typesafe/sbt-remote-control/server/target/test-classes...
[info] Passed: Total 10, Failed 0, Errors 0, Passed 10
[success] Total time: 2 s, completed Sep 9, 2014 10:34:54 PM
@corruptmemory , apologies for all the churn; I talked to @jsuereth about some issues and just wanted to get this done today while you were out. Once I started to mess with it it was easier to break it up than mess with the whole thing at once. I tried to keep your github creds on the big commits.
This PR includes https://github.com/sbt/sbt-remote-control/pull/194 so feel free to review https://github.com/sbt/sbt-remote-control/pull/194 separately and then review this one.
I don't have scalacheck stuff in here, just to keep it separate. It should be layered in next. I think I found a working way to remove a lot of the additions to DynamicSerialization, the lazy vals, and the Implicit prioritization, so that keeps the patch smaller.
Other than those items, I think either this plus the earlier PRs today incorporate the stuff from https://github.com/sbt/sbt-remote-control/pull/190
From here we could strip out some of the stuff we want to keep private, and there are also several TODO in this patch, but I believe this is a working checkpoint that should be easier for @jsuereth and/or @gkossakowski to get a handle on as we evolve it.