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

chore(deps): bump date-fns to v3 #656

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Jan 10, 2024
Merged

Conversation

frsimond
Copy link
Contributor

@frsimond frsimond commented Jan 8, 2024

I try here to solve #655 and support last version of date-fns with its breaking changes.
I decided heer to keep a specific package for backwards compatibility. Not a fan of the resulting code duplication but it's a proposal.

@dmtrKovalenko
Copy link
Owner

I'm ok with duplication but we should probably bump the major version as well. Not sure for all of packages or not

@frsimond
Copy link
Contributor Author

frsimond commented Jan 9, 2024

Ok. I totally agree that @date-io/date-fns should have a major version bump. I don't think we need to bump the version globally.
Should I bump the version(s) myself in this PR ?

@dmtrKovalenko
Copy link
Owner

dmtrKovalenko commented Jan 9, 2024

We can do that later, but what is requried right now it to ensure that the tests are running for both versions of date-fns and we have proper 100% coverage support

@frsimond frsimond changed the title chore(deps): bump date-fns to v3 and keep specific date-fns-v2 package chore(deps): bump date-fns to v3 Jan 9, 2024
@dmtrKovalenko
Copy link
Owner

Sorry, why did you remove the date-fns-v2?

@frsimond
Copy link
Contributor Author

frsimond commented Jan 9, 2024

Working on the tests, I decided to revert the date-fns-v2 because those have explicit reference to the date-fns package.
And I dont know how to reference two different versions of the same dependency in the same file.

Furthermore, I think that keeping an old version might be overengineered if we do a major version bump on @date-io/date-fns

@frsimond
Copy link
Contributor Author

frsimond commented Jan 9, 2024

@dmtrKovalenko do you think we should maintain a compatibility with date-fns v2 on master ?
If so, we might have to change the structure of the repo a little bit to have package-specific tests files.

@dmtrKovalenko
Copy link
Owner

Thank you for contributation, I am going to merge this right and now and make another breaking changes that I wanted to make for a long time and will release a new version today

@dmtrKovalenko dmtrKovalenko merged commit 2413795 into dmtrKovalenko:master Jan 10, 2024
4 checks passed
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

2 participants