Require azure-core-cpp <1.11

[jdblischak]

Checklist

• Used a personal fork of the feedstock to propose changes
• Bumped the build number (if the version is unchanged)
• Re-rendered with the latest conda-smithy (Use the phrase @conda-forge-admin, please rerender in a comment in this PR for automated rerendering)
• Ensured the license file is being packaged.

---

The recent release of azure-core-cpp 1.11.0 (which is supposed to be backwards compatible with 1.x) has unexpectedly broken the tiledb conda binary. This PR is a temporary stop-gap measure to prevent uploading any future binaries that allow being co-installed with azure-core-cpp >= 1.11 until we can identify and fix the problem upstream.

Note that I purposefully did not bump the build number or rerender. I don't want new binaries uploaded from this PR. It is simply to prevent any new uploads (eg that are triggered by automated migrations) until we can fix the problem. Ideally this pin will be removed in the next update PR.

xref: conda-forge/azure-core-cpp-feedstock#10 (comment) and conda-forge/admin-requests#911

[conda-forge-webservices]

Hi! This is the friendly automated conda-forge-linting service.

I just wanted to let you know that I linted all conda-recipes in your PR (recipe) and found it was in an excellent condition.

[akrherz]

Note that I purposefully did not bump the build number or rerender. I don't want new binaries uploaded from this PR.

If you want that to happen, you have to add all the magic [skip-ci] ... etc tags to the commit otherwise CI will upload a build.

[jdblischak]

otherwise CI will upload a build

If version and build_number are identical, the binaries aren't uploaded. That's why the check boxes are there to remind people to bump the build number. Updates like rerendering or editing the dependencies have no effect on the decision to upload a binary to anaconda.org

[jdblischak]

Also xref #228

[akrherz]

If version and build_number are identical, the binaries aren't uploaded.

My apologies @jdblischak , I was clearly wrong about this. :( I would add though that the env hash must be included in this check as well.