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

Backport PR #2479: bugfix for viewer rename when viewer ID is differe… #2483

Merged

Conversation

bmorris3
Copy link
Contributor

Manual backport of #2479.

Change log entry

  • Is a change log needed? If yes, is it added to CHANGES.rst? If you want to avoid merge conflicts,
    list the proposed change log here for review and add to CHANGES.rst before merge. If no, maintainer
    should add a no-changelog-entry-needed label.

Checklist for package maintainer(s)

This checklist is meant to remind the package maintainer(s) who will review this pull request of some common things to look for. This list is not exhaustive.

  • Are two approvals required? Branch protection rule does not check for the second approval. If a second approval is not necessary, please apply the trivial label.
  • Do the proposed changes actually accomplish desired goals? Also manually run the affected example notebooks, if necessary.
  • Do the proposed changes follow the STScI Style Guides?
  • Are tests added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the STScI Style Guides?
  • Are docs added/updated as required? If so, do they follow the STScI Style Guides?
  • Did the CI pass? If not, are the failures related?
  • Is a milestone set? Set this to bugfix milestone if this is a bug fix and needs to be released ASAP; otherwise, set this to the next major release milestone.
  • After merge, any internal documentations need updating (e.g., JIRA, Innerspace)?

@bmorris3 bmorris3 added the bug Something isn't working label Sep 27, 2023
@bmorris3 bmorris3 added this to the 3.7.1 milestone Sep 27, 2023
@kecnry kecnry added the no-changelog-entry-needed changelog bot directive label Sep 27, 2023
@kecnry
Copy link
Member

kecnry commented Sep 27, 2023

Hang on... is the change log in the right section? Something seems off since the other entry above it was milestoned in 3.6.x

@bmorris3
Copy link
Contributor Author

@kecnry I was also confused when I cherry-picked, because there was no unreleased section at the top. Should I create the headings for an unreleased 3.7.1 section?

@kecnry
Copy link
Member

kecnry commented Sep 27, 2023

Yes, please! Looks like it should go at the very top of the change log above 3.7 and mirror the one on main. Thanks!

@bmorris3 bmorris3 force-pushed the auto-backport-of-pr-2479-on-v3.7.x branch from cb547d8 to df1207e Compare September 27, 2023 17:48
@bmorris3 bmorris3 force-pushed the auto-backport-of-pr-2479-on-v3.7.x branch from df1207e to 469172d Compare September 27, 2023 17:59
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 27, 2023

Codecov Report

Attention: 1 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Files Coverage Δ
jdaviz/app.py 85.18% <50.00%> (-0.09%) ⬇️

📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know!.

@bmorris3 bmorris3 merged commit c049540 into spacetelescope:v3.7.x Sep 27, 2023
12 of 14 checks passed
@@ -1,3 +1,27 @@
3.7.1 (unreleased)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Interesting. I thought @cshanahan1 added this after releasing 3.7

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working no-changelog-entry-needed changelog bot directive Ready for final review
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants