- I was on a plane and this failed with:
```
expected block to not output to stderr, but output
"curl: (6) Could not resolve host: spdx.github.io\nWarning: Failed to fetch SBOM schema, cannot perform SBOM validation!
Warning: Could not fetch JSON schema to validate SBOM!\nWarning: SBOM is not valid, not writing to disk!"
```
- Part of trying to reduce the number of `Excludes:` we have in our
RuboCop configs.
- The fixes here all seemed reasonable, with some minimal tweaks for
line length and less floatiness. Apart from `test/dev-cmd/bottle_spec.rb`
where RuboCop wanted to do some ridiculously floaty indentation and there
wasn't an obvious alternative place to break the lines, so I opted for
in-line disables instead.
Remove all code related to Bintray. It no longer works so there's no
point keeping it around.
Some of this could arguably be deprecated/disabled first/instead but:
I'm not sure I see the sense in keeping stuff around that's known to be
broken.
For :all bottle blocks in linuxbrew-core, we are going to remove the bottle
block completely before rebottling.
In linuxbrew-core, we use --keep-old to keep the macOS sha lines.
I am not sure why this exception was written initially, but it
now prevents bottling these formulae, because we have no bottle block
and use --keep-old.
I think it's safe to just skip this check, when there is no bottle block
the old_checksum can just directly return nil.
This allows the creation of bottles which will be used by any macOS
version, architecture or OS (i.e. macOS or Linux).
Add `TODO` stubs for where the bottle generation logic should be
implemented.
With #10186 now merged, the tag specific cellar information is being read by brew.
This PR (once merged) will start adding the cellar information for each tag instead
of having a single cellar line on the top of the bottle block.
Each new CI build in homebrew-core will slowly start migrating the cellar lines to
the right place. If keep-old is used, the old "all tag" cellar line is removed and
added to each tag.
- Extract the json reading from the json merging: it makes the code hard to understand.
This helps for the separation of concerns: the jsons are read in one method;
and merged in a second one
- Added a first test to check the merge function
No change in behaviour was done, this change is just there to increase code coverage
and to prepare for #9315
