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

ver bump #180

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 14, 2024
Merged

ver bump #180

merged 2 commits into from
May 14, 2024

Conversation

tenox7
Copy link
Owner

@tenox7 tenox7 commented May 12, 2024

No description provided.

@edgar-bonet
Copy link
Collaborator

I think the CI is failing because the PR is missing this change:

diff --git a/recordings/expected.txt b/recordings/expected.txt
index 0787a65..f191fdc 100644
--- a/recordings/expected.txt
+++ b/recordings/expected.txt
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
 |  │                                                                                       |
 |  └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────> |
 |     X                                                           Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970 |
-|     �[0m�[7m �[0m                                            https://github.com/tenox7/ttyplot 1.6.2 |
+|     �[0m�[7m �[0m                                            https://github.com/tenox7/ttyplot 1.6.5 |
 +------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 
 [90x20] Frame 2:
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@
 |  │                                                                                    �[0m�[7mX�[0m�[0m�[7mX�[0m |
 |  └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────> |
 |     X last=3.0 min=1.0 max=3.0 avg=2.0                          Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970 |
-|     �[0m�[7m �[0m last=4.0 min=2.0 max=4.0 avg=3.0           https://github.com/tenox7/ttyplot 1.6.2 |
+|     �[0m�[7m �[0m last=4.0 min=2.0 max=4.0 avg=3.0           https://github.com/tenox7/ttyplot 1.6.5 |
 +------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 
 [90x20] Frame 3:
@@ -67,6 +67,6 @@
 |  │                                                                                    �[0m�[7mX�[0m�[0m�[7mX�[0m |
 |  └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────> |
 |     X last=3.0 min=1.0 max=3.0 avg=2.0                          Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970 |
-|     �[0m�[7m �[0m last=4.0 min=2.0 max=4.0 avg=3.0           https://github.com/tenox7/ttyplot 1.6.2 |
+|     �[0m�[7m �[0m last=4.0 min=2.0 max=4.0 avg=3.0           https://github.com/tenox7/ttyplot 1.6.5 |
 +------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
 

@chenrui333
Copy link
Contributor

@tenox7 any luck with this pr?

@tenox7
Copy link
Owner Author

tenox7 commented May 14, 2024

@edgar-bonet or @hartwork please approve and merge? thanks

@tenox7 tenox7 requested review from hartwork and edgar-bonet May 14, 2024 02:09
Copy link
Collaborator

@edgar-bonet edgar-bonet left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh, this looks a bit messy to me. How could we merge this pull request? Ideally, when a PR is just one main commit + one fixup, I would do a squash merge. This, however, would leave the version-tagged commit out of the master's history (kind of weird), and most likely out of GitHub's “Releases” page (clearly undesirable). Creating a merge commit would leave the tagged commit on a side branch, out of the “mainline“ history of git log --first-parent. I guess the best option would be a fast-forward merge, which should be done on the command line, as it is not available on GitHub's Web UI.

In any case, the tagged commit would still be failing CI. Maybe it's not a big deal, as this failure does not impact the final user. Thus I am approving this PR.

Maybe we should think about a recommended procedure for future version bumps. I would vote for PR + fast-forward-merge, and only tag after merging. @hartwork: what would you recommend?

For the record, this is what the git history would look like after this PR is merged, depending on the merge strategy:

=== Squash merge ===

* xxxxxxx (master) Merge pull request #180 from tenox7/bump
| * a415384 (tag: 1.6.5) ver bump
|/
* 9bbca81 (tag: 1.6.4) bump to 1.6.4
⋮

=== Merge commit ===

* xxxxxxx (master) Merge pull request #180 from tenox7/bump
|\
| * 1cd8be8 update expected
| * a415384 (tag: 1.6.5) ver bump
|/
* 9bbca81 (tag: 1.6.4) bump to 1.6.4
⋮

=== Fast forward ===

* 1cd8be8 (master) update expected
* a415384 (tag: 1.6.5) ver bump
* 9bbca81 (tag: 1.6.4) bump to 1.6.4
⋮

@tenox7 tenox7 merged commit cbaff3a into master May 14, 2024
16 checks passed
@hartwork
Copy link
Collaborator

@edgar-bonet ideally the tag would sit on some commit that (1) includes all changes from that release (which tag 1.6.5 violates btw) and (2) is a predecessor to (or equal of) the default branch. Tag latest master after merge satisfies that when targetting the right commit.

@edgar-bonet edgar-bonet deleted the bump branch May 20, 2024 16:46
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.

4 participants