clang-format-action
clang-format-action copied to clipboard
jidicula
Refactor task - use Ubuntu Mantic for `clang-format` versions 13 through 16
Ubuntu Mantic also contains clang-format versions 13 through 16. As much as possible, I prefer to reduce the number of Ubuntu versions I'm shipping in my Docker images. Switching versions 13 through 16 to Mantic would allow me to drop the Lunar dependency.
This task is fairly simple - in these lines, switch the Ubuntu version to mantic to match version 17.
@Xav83 if you're looking for some more low-hanging fruit for Hacktoberfest, feel free to take a swing at this ☝️
@jidicula it seems like this image change wasn't entirely backwards compatible for our simple use case:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@v3
- name: Run clang-format style check for C/C++/Protobuf programs.
uses: jidicula/[email protected]
with:
clang-format-version: "16"
Could you revert this change and then push it out again but with a new tag? That at least gives people the ability to opt into it
@jidicula it seems like this image change wasn't entirely backwards compatible for our simple use case:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest steps: - uses: actions/checkout@v3 - name: Run clang-format style check for C/C++/Protobuf programs. uses: jidicula/[email protected] with: clang-format-version: "16"Could you revert this change and then push it out again but with a new tag? That at least gives people the ability to opt into it
@danperkins sorry about that! I've reverted the change in #167 and merged it, so the new images will be built and shipping shortly and your workflows will start functioning again.
What was the specific issue you were seeing with your use-case?
@jidicula thanks for the quick response! Someone from our team is working through the formatting changes now so that we can move to the new version before too long. It seems like it was just caused by us having the formatting and linting happing in slightly different pipelines. Clang was unhappy with some of the spacing/tabs in our files after the change. I guess we could have tried rolling back to 4.10.0 to see if we could have been stable on that version after 4.11.0 changed.