Upgrade dependencies and set MSRV to 1.65#61
Closed
Bravo555 wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Conversation
The dependencies were upgraded to handle [workspace inheritance introduced in cargo 1.64][1]. MSRV was set to the minimal version required to compile (1.65 due to usage of let else in cargo). This PR resolves meta-rust#60. On the same note meta-rust#46 should also probably get closed since AFAIK it's already been resolved. [1]: rust-lang/cargo#10859 Signed-off-by: Marcel Guzik <marcel.guzik@inetum.com>
bachp
approved these changes
Apr 20, 2023
Contributor
|
This may not be necessary anymore given |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The dependencies were upgraded to handle workspace inheritance introduced in cargo 1.64. MSRV was set to the minimal version required to compile (1.65 due to usage of let else in cargo).
This PR resolves #60. On the same note #46 should also probably get closed since AFAIK it's already been resolved.