-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 83
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
Bump version to 1.8.0. #417
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #417 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 33.39% 33.39%
=======================================
Files 22 22
Lines 3980 3980
=======================================
Hits 1329 1329
Misses 2520 2520
Partials 131 131 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Do we want to include some of the currently open PRs into the release?
@hanzei |
@avas27JTG We can create a release with just #408 if we want to limit the scope of this and get it out sooner. It's not a small PR, but if it's easy to cherry-pick, maybe we should go with that to keep the release smaller. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wonder if #371 severe enough that we would take on the afford of releasing a version just to fix it.
Cherry pick is possible but please let me know if we should go with it or do a full release #417 (review) @mickmister @hanzei |
@hanzei The title of the PR is a bit misleading, as the main benefit of the PR is that we limit the number of API calls from the frontend from 4 to just 1 on websocket reconnect. Pushing this change is in theory going to help with the issues happening with intermittent logouts due to token management, see thread for discussion. This is a bit of a bandaid for the problem, but we're trying to mitigate the issue as much as we can, with what we currently have available to us. I have experienced the issue on community twice now, though haven't seen it for a few weeks. Someone recently reported this so we know others are running into it too #411 |
Yeah I'm thinking we should cherry-pick that PR to minimize changes in the release. Unless it proves too difficult to cherry-pick that. There's no set timeline on this, but I think we should get it out soon if we can. Thoughts @hanzei @avas27JTG? Open to other strategies here |
@mickmister I will check if cherry-pick is easy here, but just a thought even by cherry-pick we will create a new version, so why not create a release with everything we have in Please add your thoughts. |
@avas27JTG Mainly to keep the release smaller, though it's already pretty small besides the link tooltip feature. If we're good to ship that feature as it currently stands, then let's just ship off of master 👍 |
@avas27JTG Are you thinking we should wait to merge more PRs, or release what we currently have? |
@mickmister We have some PRs pending on just QA review so, I think we should get them QA reviewed max by this and next week and cut the release including them as well by the next week, but if we need to do the release this week we can go with what we have currently. |
@avas27JTG I'm thinking it's good to get #371 out, if we think the release will take longer than originally expected |
@mickmister this release is ready we are just waiting on a final QA sanity which is expected to be completed by max Friday this week i.e. 15th so, we would be able to push it on or before 15th Dec as soon as QA sanity is done. If any bug/issue found here during the sanity, then we can take out #371 in a dot release. |
Tested and approved |
@mickmister this release is ready now with QA approval, we can proceed with next steps. |
…lab into release-bump-1.8.0
@ayusht2810 @avas27JTG I'm thinking it's best not to bring in significant changes (e.g. link tooltip feature) after the release has been approved by QA. The defined scope of the release has changed because of this. I'm thinking we should release what has been running on community as |
Make sense, thanks @mickmister we will mention tooltip issue in |
Removed #301 from the description of this PR as it will not be a part of this release. |
Summary