feat: Add option for whether to check package.json semver compliance

[james-pre]

This PR adds the checkPackageVersion config option. When set to false, the version field of package.json will not be checked for semver compliance. When set to true (the default), it will have the current behavior.

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 8d9f383

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 8 packages

Name	Type
app-builder-lib	Minor
dmg-builder	Minor
electron-builder-squirrel-windows	Minor
electron-builder	Minor
electron-forge-maker-appimage	Minor
electron-forge-maker-nsis-web	Minor
electron-forge-maker-nsis	Minor
electron-forge-maker-snap	Minor

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for car-park-attendant-cleat-11576 ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	8d9f383
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/car-park-attendant-cleat-11576/deploys/649b43e4e3d6610008b294bf
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-7639--car-park-attendant-cleat-11576.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[mmaietta]

Is this implementing a specific issue? Looking to understand the context as to why we wouldn't want to verify semver compliance.

[james-pre]

This is related to #7173: For applications not published to a registry, the version field of package.json does not need to be semver. When trying to build when this is the case, it fails regardless of whether extraMetadata.version is set.

[mmaietta]

@dr-vortex semver validation for Windows was already removed in Oct 2022.
#7174

[james-pre]

@mmaietta I saw this PR. Semver validation was not removed for the version field of package.json.

[mmaietta]

I'm always wary of adding a new option to the configuration but IIRC, this PR also broke numerous unit tests. I'll reopen this, but you'll need to take an alternative approach. What is your version format?

[james-pre]

@mmaietta I'm using a non-semver for version. Since I depend on the version in other parts of the application, I put it in package.json instead of using config specific to electron-builder.

The tests may need to be updated if they check against the old config interface.

[james-pre]

Also, I have not made any commits since I renamed the PR so checks will need to be run again.

[mmaietta]

Hi @dr-vortex, I've rerun all tests and they're still failing due to changes in this PR

[james-pre]

The semantic versioning enforcer (which checks for PR title prefixes) is failing despite the prefix existing.

[mmaietta]

Incorrect. Please see Test / test-mac and Test / test-linux test failures

[github-actions]

This PR is stale because it has been open 45 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 10 days.

[james-pre]

Note that this is still broken.
Resolves #7789

[mmaietta]

Note, your PR is still broken
#7639 (comment)

[james-pre]

Note that this is still broken.
Resolves #7789

I was talking about the PR here

[mmaietta]

The back-and-forth on this PR disregarding your code failing to pass the unit test suite is rather a nuisance. Closing PR and unsubscribing from this. I'll look forward to more productive conversations elsewhere