Prior to this change the vcpkg port files were taken directly from the main vcpkg repository. This results in a dependency changing from time-to-time and breaking the Bitcoin Core build.
This change places the port files in a separate repository where they and the dependencies they install will only be updated when necessary.
I’ve put the port files in a repository under my account. It’s a one line change to the appveyor job to switch to a Bitcoin Core repository.
Prior to this change the vcpkg port files were taken directly from the main vcpkg repository. This results in a dependency changing from time-to-time and breaking the Bitcoin Core build.
This change places the port files in a separate repository where they and the dependencies they install will only be updated when necessary.
why not just using a specific commit of vcpkg instead?
That’s also an option. Doesn’t give the same flexibility though. We may want to update the versions of different dependencies separately. If we reference a vcpkg commit then we’re tied to the specific combination of port files in it.
That being said using a vcpkg commit reference should fix the original concern and be a lighter touch than the separate repo approach used in this PR.
I think either approach would be fine and don’t have strong feelings as to which.
git checkout), and make sure this can’t be changed.
That’s also an option. Doesn’t give the same flexibility though.
Agree with @NicolasDorier . We don’t need the flexibility. All we need is packages not to randomly change from down under us.