ACCESS-NRI/spack-packages as git-based packages repo#82
Merged
Conversation
github-project-automation
bot
moved this to New Issues 🌅
in Spack `0.22` to `1.0` Migration
CodeGat
moved this from New Issues 🌅
to In Progress 🏗️
in Spack `0.22` to `1.0` Migration
Member
Author
|
In any case, I will need to update the branch name to |
CodeGat
force-pushed
the
access-spack-packages-as-git-repo
branch
from
86bf1e4 to
f5152f1
Compare
Member
Author
|
This is ready for review, but this PR will be one of the last ones merged as it affects |
6 tasks
… make it git-based
CodeGat
force-pushed
the
access-spack-packages-as-git-repo
branch
from
f5152f1 to
fbd5430
Compare
CodeGat
commented
Oct 30, 2025
4 tasks
CodeGat
force-pushed
the
access-spack-packages-as-git-repo
branch
from
fbd5430 to
24fbd2a
Compare
1 task
CodeGat
added a commit
to CABLE-LSM/CABLE
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 11, 2025
…nge (#653) # CABLE Thank you for submitting a pull request to the CABLE Project. ## Description We are updating our `build-ci` infrastructure so it will be able to support `spack >= v1.0` more fully. There is an incoming change (see ACCESS-NRI/spack-config#82) to `spack-config` to forward this goal, that will no longer work with `build-ci@v2`. There is a new version of `build-ci@v3` (see ACCESS-NRI/build-ci#253) that will work with this new version of `spack-config`, but it is not yet ready for merging. This interim fix for `build-ci@v2` will work while `build-ci@v3` is being tested, so there is no downtime between versions, by pinning the version of `spack-config` to a tag before the breaking change. > [!NOTE] > Open pull requests will need to be rebased to get this fix, or a similar pinning of `spack-config-ref` in the PR added ## Type of change - [x] Bug fix <!-- readthedocs-preview cable start --> ---- 📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://cable--653.org.readthedocs.build/en/653/ <!-- readthedocs-preview cable end -->
github-project-automation
bot
moved this from Review 👏
to Done ✅
in Spack `0.22` to `1.0` Migration
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
2 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.
References #81
Background
Rather than having our
spack-packagesrepository as a path-based repo in our configuration, we should make use of the newspack repocommands and update it to a git-based repository.This will make existing
build-ciandbuild-cdrepositories have less custom logic, as we can usespackcommands to interrogate packages repositories.The PR
ACCESS-NRI/spack-packagesto a git-based packages repository in thecommon-api-v2repos.yaml(affecting all linked files)Testing
See ACCESS-NRI/access-spack-packages#339