Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Release 0.4.0 due to minor-level change intruduced by @alubbe
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
@19h
19h committed Feb 16, 2015
1 parent 4369bea commit 6be09b0
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 2 changed files with 2 additions and 2 deletions.
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion component.json
View file
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
{
"name": "dialog",
"description": "Dialog component",
"version": "0.3.1",
"version": "0.4.0",
"keywords": [
"dialog",
"ui",
Expand Down
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion package.json
View file
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
{
"name": "dialog-component",
"description": "Dialog component",
"version": "0.3.1",
"version": "0.4.0",
"keywords": [
"dialog",
"ui"
Expand Down

4 comments on commit 6be09b0

@pirxpilot
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@KenanSulayman - if you want to keep releasing this (or other components) it would be great if you

  • give other contributors a chance to voice an opinion on the changes/PRs you are taking into master - an hour is just not enough time to review anything
  • make sure that braking changes bump major version number - in this case we should probably just remove Dialog.fixed function and go straight to 1.0.0 - changing CSS like that is not a minor change
  • always update History.md - preferably using git-changelog from git-extras
  • always update the demo for the component - in this case http://component.github.io/dialog/
    Thanks!

@19h
Copy link
Contributor Author

@19h 19h commented on 6be09b0 Feb 16, 2015

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shall we go to 1.0.0? We just had a quick meeting and there's quite probably another change upcoming by one of our designers. That is, please take a look at deprecated things that may well disappear with a 1.0.0. Additionally, I'd love to collect more input before going to a major bump. ✌️

@pirxpilot
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We probably should have done that: I am worried 0.4 broke things for people. For example did you check if effects are still working?
And yes we should be bumping major version number wherever we introduce breaking changes.

Also - meetings - even quick ;-) - don't work that well in open source. You gals and guys (whoever 'you' are) are more than welcome to maintain your own fork. But if you want to develop these components under the component umbrella you need to take into account that there are people using them: let's go the usual issue/PR/feedback on github/possibly release route here.

@19h
Copy link
Contributor Author

@19h 19h commented on 6be09b0 Feb 16, 2015

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we have a little misunderstanding here. This merge doesn't have anything to do with "business", I just merged it and it's unrelated. I understand and accept your point that I should've included at least some peer reviews, however, I tested this change, and ran all our integration tests against this change. Additionally, I am confident, which is why I merged this, that components alike should evolve to being as much CSS as possible.

The meeting point was that we have a change that could land if we actually were to release a major 1.0.0. That is, I am completely comfortable to make changes pending for some days allowing discussions, if you fancy that.

Please sign in to comment.