Update dependencies from https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore-tooling build 20200514.9#21861
Update dependencies from https://github.com/dotnet/aspnetcore-tooling build 20200514.9#21861dougbu wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
dougbu
commented
May 15, 2020
- Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Razor.Extensions, Microsoft.AspNetCore.Razor.Language, Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.Razor, Microsoft.NET.Sdk.Razor
- '5.0.0-preview.6.20264.6' => '5.0.0-preview.6.20264.9'
- Numerous dotnet/runtime packages: '5.0.0-preview.5.20260.5' => '5.0.0-preview.6.20263.7'
…build 20200514.9 - Microsoft.AspNetCore.Mvc.Razor.Extensions, Microsoft.AspNetCore.Razor.Language, Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.Razor, Microsoft.NET.Sdk.Razor - '5.0.0-preview.6.20264.6' => '5.0.0-preview.6.20264.9' - Numerous dotnet/runtime packages: '5.0.0-preview.5.20260.5' => '5.0.0-preview.6.20263.7'
|
/fyi Looks like my local dependency updates in #21630 left things incoherent enough that triggering our subscription from aspnetcore-tooling isn't working. @mmitche I had to run darc update-dependencies --source-repo aspnetcore-tooling --channel '.NET 5 Dev'
darc update-dependencies --coherency-onlyWhy didn't the coherency check in the first command do anything? |
That is very odd...it should absolutely have done so. Do you have the source sha that you were on that showed the issue? (you can probably get it from git reflog) |
|
I was at 035fb4e in aspnetcore. The original aspnetcore-tooling and runtime SHAs are visible in the diffs here. |
|
The current conflicting files are also weird: 4c53afe updated dependencies from dotnet/efcore. But, it applied "Dependency coherency updates" on everything from dotnet/runtime. We have no |
|
@mmitche any luck so far❔ At this point, either I redo this branch based on the latest 'master' (to clear the conflicts) or you should figure out why triggering the aspnetcore-tooling ➡️ aspnetcore / 'master' subscription doesn't do anything. Your preference❔ |
|
@dougbu It's becuase the subscription was disabled: |
|
Shoot, I forgot I did that while working on #21630❕ My bad and thanks for noticing. But, I submit that it would be "nice" (at least) for |