Fix sandbox call on 1.11-beta

[kbarros]

As a possible fix to #86, one could modify the arguments to sandbox at the call site, depending on a static version comparison. This would minimize code duplication by reusing the rest of the code inside src/julia-1.9. In this branch, tests pass for me locally on both 1.10 and 1.11-beta.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 79.34783% with 19 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 39.06%. Comparing base (621a776) to head (b8f9be5).

Files	Patch %	Lines
src/julia-1.11/activate_set.jl	70.73%	12 Missing ⚠️
src/julia-1.11/common.jl	84.09%	7 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #87       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   73.91%   39.06%   -34.85%     
===========================================
  Files          25       28        +3     
  Lines         621      709       +88     
===========================================
- Hits          459      277      -182     
- Misses        162      432      +270     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[kbarros]

Is this blocked on the Codecov failure? This PR just removes one of the arguments to sandbox when Julia 1.11 is detected. Any suggestions for pushing the PR forward?

[oxinabox]

Sorry no this is blocked by me not seeing it til now.
Don't hesitate to bump PRs after a week or so, its very easy for people maintaining many packages to not see a notification/email.

Having given this some thought,
I think the better thing to do is to copy julia-1.9 into a julia-1.11 folder, and make the change there.
We used to have a lot of these branches in the code before and it got pretty confusing once you get enough of them.
Which is how we ended up with the current multiple folders solution (with an multiple branches solution between the two)
As I wouldn't be surprised to need more for 1.11, with the new workspaces functionality.
(But we won't see that til some one tried TestEnv in somehing using it extensively and it breaks).

[kbarros]

I have updated the PR as you suggested. The new commits undo all modifications to the julia-1.9/ folder, and create a new directory julia-1.11/ with the minimal fixes. Tests pass locally on 1.10 and 1.11.0-beta2. Merging this PR will hopefully unblock julia-vscode/TestItemRunner.jl#72.

[davidanthoff]

@oxinabox ready to merge now?

[davidanthoff]

@oxinabox could you maybe make me a co-maintainer of this repo so that I can merge PRs like this one?

[kbarros]

Gentle ping

[oxinabox]

Sorry I was away for a bit.
Will add David as a comaintainer. I thought I did so a year ago.

This needs to also add 1.10 and 1.11 to the CI matrix

[kbarros]

I tried naively adding 1.11 to the CI matrix. This throws an error, since 1.11 hasn't been released. How to proceed?

---

Update: From this documentation, the correct syntax seems to be ^1.11.0-beta2. Now the only remaining CI failure is on Julia 1.4, but that seems unrelated to this PR.

I think this PR is ready to merge.

[davidanthoff]

@oxinabox I think I still don't have write access so that I can merge things?

[oxinabox]

I am good for this to be merged, I am going to leave it to David to actually merge because I want to check I setup his permissions right, since i failed the first time