Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

upgrade to Safe.Meta 5.1.0 #632

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 11, 2024
Merged

upgrade to Safe.Meta 5.1.0 #632

merged 2 commits into from
Oct 11, 2024

Conversation

Larocceau
Copy link
Contributor

Upgrade to use SAFE.Meta 5.1.0
Closes #631

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You don't need to change these lines. ~> means "compatible with", so ~> 5 is fine.

See https://fsprojects.github.io/Paket/nuget-dependencies.html#Pessimistic-version-constraint.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah crap, I was afraid of that... that means ppl are going to have unexpected breaking changes when they update their packages on SAFE 5.x apps. Perhaps we should release a 5.1.1 of the meta packages and revert those breaking changes? Then we could release them as 6.0.0, paired with SAFE.Template 6.0.0?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmm yeah good point 🫤 What do you reckon about a 6.0 release @isaacabraham?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If we don't want a v6 template release, we could break the synchronisation with metapackages.

@isaacabraham
Copy link
Member

Hmm. I'll be honest - I'm really not that fussed about a minor breaking change like this. I suppose we could work around it by changing the name of the union case to e.g. InProgress and then making an alias Loading which is InProgress None but I think that this will be more trouble than it's worth.

The number of people that are aware of and using SAFE.Meta types since we've released it will be very small, I think.

As long as we add some decent docs (that we can add to the /// comments) I think that that's acceptable.

@Larocceau Larocceau merged commit 364e690 into master Oct 11, 2024
1 check passed
@jwthomson jwthomson deleted the safe.meta-5.1.0 branch October 11, 2024 15:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Upgrade to Meta v 5.1.0
4 participants