-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
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
Add Version #70
Comments
Perhaps under this issue, or perhaps under a new issue, we should also consider publishing some of the artifacts contained (or generated) here out to package repositories, in order to remove the need to use Git submodules downstream. 🤔 |
Work under this issue should include, or at least generate, work on ably-common-go so that the version is propagated to there. See this internal pull request for context. |
I already touched on this earlier in #142 (comment) but I remain of the mind that this repository does need a 'global version number', starting at If that means moving sources that are not planned to be versioned into another repository (e.g. the JSON Schemas) then I think that's an acceptable cost to pay. It's a one-time job and doesn't change how they appear to downstream consumers. WDYT, @lmars @paddybyers @jaley @stmoreau @owenpearson ? |
This work is anticipated to be done by the SDK Team, probably myself, so I am adding the |
@QuintinWillison apologies for not replying sooner. I question this statement in the description:
Could you perhaps expand on what about the contents of ably-common you think implies that the version should either closely or exactly follow the Ably protocol version? |
We've had valuable discussion around this under this internal Slack thread started by @Morganamilo. Within that discussion I stated:
To which I added, in relation to what's on the roadmap after working on this ticket:
I'm currently waiting to see if anybody has any objections to that approach and will report back here if/when that new repository gets created. This issue, at that point, would then be moved to that new repository. |
I notice this issue has been closed by the Unito sync bot, indicating that it was closed moved to 'done' (or another final state) in Jira. Inline with our GitHub First guidance, we should ideally be closing issues in GitHub, with a comment explaining why, so here I am to retrospectively add that comment... 😁 Having discussed this issue with @Morganamilo we agreed that there is no work to do here, because we have now moved the canonical features to its own dedicated |
As we do for our other code repositories, this repository should have:
The version is going to effectively end up closely, or exactly, representing the Ably protocol version.
┆Issue is synchronized with this Jira Task by Unito
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: