chore: module-renaming workflow inverts between libevm
and geth
#152
+65
−36
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Why this should be merged
Originally I'd planned on doing an upstream sync by running the rename workflow on the incoming commit and then merging it to
main
however this resulted in hundreds of merge commits that were solely due to Go imports. Renaming the module fromava-labs/libevm
toethereum/go-ethereum
removed 90% of conflicts (H/T @darioush). The module will then need to be namedava-labs/libevm
again, so the commit history will probably1 look like this after an update:How this works
The current module name is determined with
go list -m
and the rename from/to patterns are no longer hard-coded.How this was tested
Inspection of runs and resulting branch. Although these were the bc8e501 workflow, the only other commit in this PR is cosmetic (as seen in this run to create f2cecaf).
main
@ d32c7e0 changes fromlibevm
togo-ethereum
:a. Run
b. Commit
c. Created branch
arr4n/auto/test-invertible-rename
arr4n/auto/test-invertible-rename
changes back tolibevm
:a. Run
b. Commit
c. Auto-generated branch is identical to
main
at the time of runningFootnotes
Specifics of and rationale behind the merge strategy are beyond the scope of this PR. ↩