You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I appreciate your updates to this library, but the most recent release changed how snapshots are generated and probably should've been at least a minor version change instead of a patch. When we upgraded to the most recent version, it ended up breaking our tests. It was simple enough to regenerate the snapshots, but this seems like something that could've been prevented with stricter versioning.
Thanks again for your continued work. Cheers! π
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi @srapp, I understand that was a breaking change for most people, I sent an email to NPM support this afternoon to unpublish this version so I can publish a major version instead but I still didn't get any answer.
Although that's entirely my fault and I apologise for the inconvenience.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi! I was just wondering about the behavior of the removal of the defaultProps. In our snapshots, it seems as though defaultProps of type Object {}, [Function] and boolean values get removed but not empty strings. Is this an active choice?
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@tkomstadius It looks like a bug, can you provide a small example and open an issue? Thanks!
@ronaldlokers Yes it was unpublished because it was mistakenly published as a patch version while it was actually a breaking change, so it should have been published as a major version. My mistake was to publish it as a patch version not to unpublish it. This 3.3.2 version will be published as a 4.0.0 version soon. I apologise for the inconvenience!
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IMO the correct procedure would be to release a new version (3.3.3) where the breaking changes introduced in 3.3.2 were reverted. Then release those breaking changes as 4.0.0. It causes a lot of confusion when a release is removed, as we can see from the comments here. But good to hear that the 4.0.0 is on the way.
f5181d4
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 appreciate your updates to this library, but the most recent release changed how snapshots are generated and probably should've been at least a minor version change instead of a patch. When we upgraded to the most recent version, it ended up breaking our tests. It was simple enough to regenerate the snapshots, but this seems like something that could've been prevented with stricter versioning.
Thanks again for your continued work. Cheers! π
f5181d4
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.
Hi @srapp, I understand that was a breaking change for most people, I sent an email to NPM support this afternoon to unpublish this version so I can publish a major version instead but I still didn't get any answer.
Although that's entirely my fault and I apologise for the inconvenience.
f5181d4
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.
Hi! I was just wondering about the behavior of the removal of the defaultProps. In our snapshots, it seems as though defaultProps of type
Object {}
,[Function]
and boolean values get removed but not empty strings. Is this an active choice?f5181d4
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.
Hmmm, it just took us 2 hours to find out why snapshots on 2 computers where different because you unpublished the 3.3.2 version :(
f5181d4
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.
@tkomstadius It looks like a bug, can you provide a small example and open an issue? Thanks!
@ronaldlokers Yes it was unpublished because it was mistakenly published as a patch version while it was actually a breaking change, so it should have been published as a major version. My mistake was to publish it as a patch version not to unpublish it. This
3.3.2
version will be published as a4.0.0
version soon. I apologise for the inconvenience!f5181d4
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.
IMO the correct procedure would be to release a new version (3.3.3) where the breaking changes introduced in 3.3.2 were reverted. Then release those breaking changes as 4.0.0. It causes a lot of confusion when a release is removed, as we can see from the comments here. But good to hear that the 4.0.0 is on the way.