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

Setup JSCS configuration #441

Merged
merged 4 commits into from May 2, 2015
Merged

Setup JSCS configuration #441

merged 4 commits into from May 2, 2015

Conversation

Voles
Copy link
Member

@Voles Voles commented Apr 28, 2015

Add JSCS validation to enforce a predefined code style.

@Voles
Copy link
Member Author

Voles commented Apr 29, 2015

Ready for review.
/cc @honkskillet, @chino23, @meriturva, @kotmatpockuh, @enkodellc, @kether667

@lukasz-karolewski
Copy link
Contributor

a lot of files changes, i couldn't see any changes in functionality just code styles - which is good since it's the intention here, tests passed so this one looks good, unless you want us to look at something particular?

@kotmatpockuh
Copy link

will be great to see "updated demo" )

@chino23
Copy link

chino23 commented Apr 30, 2015

looks beautiful now, nice!

Voles pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 2, 2015
@Voles Voles merged commit 1241ffb into master May 2, 2015
@Voles
Copy link
Member Author

Voles commented May 2, 2015

Thanks all, merged. Let's push things forward again! 🎈

@enkodellc
Copy link
Contributor

@Voles isn't it time to update the package version???
Also it doesn't look like any of my clone changes are in the master branch. What happened?

@Voles
Copy link
Member Author

Voles commented May 2, 2015

@enkodellc is it common to bump the version for every change? Curious to hear you opinion about this one.

Your changes to the clone functionality have been merged before and are published with the v2.3.0 release. See dd277cb?diff=unified

@enkodellc
Copy link
Contributor

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3826580/what-rules-does-software-version-numbering-follow
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning

In my opinion it is not common to bump for every change but definitely for feature changes, breaking changes, and some bug fixes. We know that version 2.1.5 was broken so if any fixes were made I would suggest a patch version bump. In our case since we fixed bugs and added features the 2.3 minor version is appropriate. For your JSCS update it should have at least moved to 2.1.6 patch.

Strange I don't see version 2.3 in the branches? I see 2.3 in releases. Maybe I am missing something. I would suggest merging 2.3 into master as it fixed several issues and added features that are commonly requested.

In addition as @kotmatpockuh suggested we should have an updated demo as well.

@Voles
Copy link
Member Author

Voles commented May 2, 2015

I don't see why we would backport the JSCS improvements. These don't add anything to previous releases, except for code style. Correct me if I'm wrong.

We do not have any branches related to the versions. Everything is on master and when a new version is released, this is nothing more than a tag.

I'm very much open for suggestions about the development flow!

You're right that the demo's should be updated, but that's out of scope for this PR.

@Voles Voles deleted the jscs-configuration branch September 25, 2015 20:43
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.

None yet

5 participants