bump-formula-pr: autobump livecheck-defined resources #20700

cho-m · 2025-09-16T04:37:40Z

This expands prior logic for :parent resources to also allow autobumping livecheck-defined resources.

Only works for some standard formats so can't deal with on_system blocks within resources, comments, etc. yet.

Have you followed the guidelines in our Contributing document?
Have you checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same change?
Have you added an explanation of what your changes do and why you'd like us to include them?
Have you written new tests for your changes? Here's an example.
Have you successfully run brew style with your changes locally?
Have you successfully run brew typecheck with your changes locally?
Have you successfully run brew tests with your changes locally?

This expands prior logic for `:parent` resources to also allow autobumping livecheck-defined resources. Only works for some standard formats so can't deal with on_system blocks within resources, comments, etc. yet.

MikeMcQuaid

Looks good when 🟢 and @samford is 👍🏻

github-actions · 2025-10-07T20:44:02Z

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

samford · 2025-10-07T22:41:59Z

Apologies for the delay, I'll try to review this tonight. The notification ended up being buried in my inbox until stalebot reminded me.

samford

I haven't manually tested this but allowing bump-formula-pr to update any resources with a livecheck block (beyond those using formula :parent) makes sense to me as the next step in gradually expanding support. Figuring out if a new version is appropriate for the formula's software is the hard part when it comes to updating resources but resource livecheck blocks should be accounting for that, at least in theory. I haven't checked the existing resource livecheck blocks recently but it would be a good idea to confirm that's still true before merging this (I can probably take a look tomorrow when I have a moment).

My review comments here only ended up being stylistic tweaks, as it looks reasonable otherwise (granted, it's late and my brain is tired, so take that with a grain of salt 😆).

samford · 2025-10-08T03:16:33Z

Library/Homebrew/dev-cmd/bump-formula-pr.rb

+          new_version = formula_version
+
+          if resource.livecheck.formula != :parent


Suggested change

new_version = formula_version

if resource.livecheck.formula != :parent

if resource.livecheck.formula == :parent

new_version = formula_version

else

We only want to set new_version to formula_version when the livecheck block uses formula :parent, so an if/else setup may make this more explicit. The existing logic works but I think this suggestion is easier to follow.

samford · 2025-10-08T03:38:59Z

Library/Homebrew/dev-cmd/bump-formula-pr.rb

+                                                                verbose: args.verbose?)
+            new_version = version_info.dig(:version, :latest)
+            odie "Resource \"#{resource.name}\" livecheck failed to get latest version!" if new_version.blank?
+            next if old_version == new_version


Suggested change

next if old_version == new_version

next if new_version == old_version

This may just be me but with comparisons, I prefer to put the variable that I'm interested in first. In this case, this suggestion would read as, "Don't proceed if the new version is the same as the old version" and I think that's easy to follow and makes it clear what we're interested in.

Sure, can update to this.

Unrelated but GitHub batch apply is suddenly not working so may have to apply each suggestion individually.

samford · 2025-10-08T03:39:46Z

Library/Homebrew/dev-cmd/bump-formula-pr.rb

+              new_version
+            elsif (old_tag = resource.specs[:tag])
+              new_tag = old_tag.gsub(old_version, new_version)
+              odie "Resource \"#{resource.name}\" tag could not be updated!" if old_tag == new_tag


Suggested change

odie "Resource \"#{resource.name}\" tag could not be updated!" if old_tag == new_tag

odie "Resource \"#{resource.name}\" tag could not be updated!" if new_tag == old_tag

Same here, if you agree with the previous comment.

samford · 2025-10-08T03:42:37Z

Library/Homebrew/dev-cmd/bump-formula-pr.rb

+              EOS
+            end
+            # Allow skipping different tags on same revision
+            next if old_revision == new_revision


Suggested change

next if old_revision == new_revision

next if new_revision == old_revision

samford · 2025-10-08T04:01:39Z

Library/Homebrew/dev-cmd/bump-formula-pr.rb

+              ^(?<ws>[ ]+)resource\ "#{resource.name}"\ do\s+
+                url\ "#{Regexp.escape(old_url)}",\s+
+                    (using:[ ]+.*,\s+)?
+                    (tag:[ ]+.*,\s+)?


Suggested change

^(?<ws>[ ]+)resource\ "#{resource.name}"\ do\s+

url\ "#{Regexp.escape(old_url)}",\s+

(using:[ ]+.*,\s+)?

(tag:[ ]+.*,\s+)?

^(?<ws> +)resource\ "#{resource.name}"\ do\s+

url\ "#{Regexp.escape(old_url)}",\s+

(using: +.*,\s+)?

(tag: +.*,\s+)?

Unless I'm overlooking something, I believe you should be able to use + here instead of [ ]+. The previous regex was using [ ]+ because the space was at the very start of the line but that's not the case here.

Extended mode (x) so either need \ or [ ]. Could switch to former as it is used it in other parts of regexp.

I really don't think we should add more regexp for this when we have AST logic already. They will be brittle and error-prone. Ideally we'd move away from the existing regexp in bump* too because they predate our vendored AST logic.

I really don't think we should add more regexp for this when we have AST logic already. They will be brittle and error-prone. Ideally we'd move away from the existing regexp in bump* too because they predate our vendored AST logic.

Sounds reasonable.

Won't have time to look into this so will close PR for now in case anyone else wants to work on it.

samford · 2025-10-08T04:01:58Z

Library/Homebrew/dev-cmd/bump-formula-pr.rb

+            new_resource_block += "\\k<ws>  version \"#{new_version}\"\n" if forced_version
+          else
+            new_url = update_url(old_url, old_version, new_version)
+            if old_url == new_url


Suggested change

if old_url == new_url

if new_url == old_url

samford · 2025-10-08T04:05:24Z

Library/Homebrew/dev-cmd/bump-formula-pr.rb

+
+            # Capture old_url to avoid possible HEAD resources
+            inreplace_regex = /
+              ^(?<ws>[ ]+)resource\ "#{resource.name}"\ do\s+


Suggested change

^(?<ws>[ ]+)resource\ "#{resource.name}"\ do\s+

^(?<ws> +)resource\ "#{resource.name}"\ do\s+

MikeMcQuaid

Pulling ✅, sorry.

MikeMcQuaid · 2025-10-08T18:21:32Z

Library/Homebrew/dev-cmd/bump-formula-pr.rb

+              ^(?<ws>[ ]+)resource\ "#{resource.name}"\ do\s+
+                url\ "#{Regexp.escape(old_url)}",\s+
+                    (using:[ ]+.*,\s+)?
+                    (tag:[ ]+.*,\s+)?


I really don't think we should add more regexp for this when we have AST logic already. They will be brittle and error-prone. Ideally we'd move away from the existing regexp in bump* too because they predate our vendored AST logic.

Removing ✅

MikeMcQuaid · 2025-10-09T08:27:55Z

@cho-m Ok, fine to merge this approach as-is as long as we create at least a # TODO and ideally a issue to cleanup this/these regexes after. Deal?

cho-m · 2025-10-12T16:10:13Z

I won't have time to finish up PR for a couple weeks. I can update PR when I am available assuming no one has superseded it.

MikeMcQuaid · 2025-10-13T07:12:43Z

@cho-m Ok, closing until then. When you reopen can we try the AST approach please.

bump-formula-pr: autobump livecheck-defined resources

736f3a8

This expands prior logic for `:parent` resources to also allow autobumping livecheck-defined resources. Only works for some standard formats so can't deal with on_system blocks within resources, comments, etc. yet.

MikeMcQuaid previously approved these changes Sep 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

cho-m mentioned this pull request Sep 24, 2025

emscripten: update resources Homebrew/homebrew-core#245516

Merged

6 tasks

github-actions bot added the stale No recent activity label Oct 7, 2025

samford removed the stale No recent activity label Oct 7, 2025

samford approved these changes Oct 8, 2025

View reviewed changes

cho-m added the in progress Maintainers are working on this label Oct 8, 2025

MikeMcQuaid reviewed Oct 8, 2025

View reviewed changes

cho-m closed this Oct 8, 2025

cho-m removed the in progress Maintainers are working on this label Oct 8, 2025

MikeMcQuaid reopened this Oct 9, 2025

MikeMcQuaid closed this Oct 13, 2025

cho-m mentioned this pull request Nov 2, 2025

Otterdog: playwright browser launch error Homebrew/homebrew-core#252272

Closed

5 tasks

p-linnane deleted the bump-formula-pr-resources branch November 5, 2025 16:37

		new_version = formula_version

		if resource.livecheck.formula != :parent

	next if old_version == new_version
	next if new_version == old_version

	odie "Resource \"#{resource.name}\" tag could not be updated!" if old_tag == new_tag
	odie "Resource \"#{resource.name}\" tag could not be updated!" if new_tag == old_tag

	next if old_revision == new_revision
	next if new_revision == old_revision

	^(?<ws>[ ]+)resource\ "#{resource.name}"\ do\s+
	^(?<ws> +)resource\ "#{resource.name}"\ do\s+

Uh oh!

bump-formula-pr: autobump livecheck-defined resources #20700

bump-formula-pr: autobump livecheck-defined resources #20700

Uh oh!

Conversation

cho-m commented Sep 16, 2025

Uh oh!

MikeMcQuaid left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Oct 7, 2025

Uh oh!

samford commented Oct 7, 2025

Uh oh!

samford left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cho-m Oct 8, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

cho-m Oct 8, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

MikeMcQuaid left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

MikeMcQuaid commented Oct 9, 2025

Uh oh!

cho-m commented Oct 12, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

MikeMcQuaid commented Oct 13, 2025

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

cho-m Oct 8, 2025 •

edited

Loading

cho-m Oct 8, 2025 •

edited

Loading

cho-m commented Oct 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading