chore: Bump libp2p-swarm dependents

[mxinden]

Description

Follow-up to #3170 (comment)

Notes

Links to any relevant issues

Should as well "fix" the cargo semver check failures for libp2p-dcutr and libp2p-relay, see #2647 (comment).

Open Questions

Change checklist

• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
• I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
• A changelog entry has been made in the appropriate crates

[thomaseizinger]

I'd like us to start prioritizing, which changes are worth a breaking change. Removing deprecated APIs is IMO not worth it, the motivation should be bigger. We should obviously remove them eventually but it would be great if we can prioritize merging backwards-compatible changes and make more patch releases.

#3170 is already merged so I am happy to go ahead here but it is something to consider for the future.

[thomaseizinger]

Should as well "fix" the cargo semver check failures for libp2p-dcutr and libp2p-relay, see #2647 (comment).

Only for the current release cycle though. Once it is released, it will come back unless we also merge #3213.

[mxinden]

I'd like us to start prioritizing, which changes are worth a breaking change. Removing deprecated APIs is IMO not worth it, the motivation should be bigger. We should obviously remove them eventually but it would be great if we can prioritize merging backwards-compatible changes and make more patch releases.

That is a good point I did not consider before.

Thus far I was operating with the mindset of always-remove-deprecation-in-next-release. Given this more thought, there is no good reason to do so, i.e. removing deprecated methods is not worth a breaking change in itself.

#3170 is already merged so I am happy to go ahead here but it is something to consider for the future.

👍 please continue being vocal about this. I will try to do better in the upcoming releases.

[thomaseizinger]

#3170 is already merged so I am happy to go ahead here but it is something to consider for the future.

👍 please continue being vocal about this. I will try to do better in the upcoming releases.

It only came to my mind on this PR actually! To make this planning manageable, I'd suggest we create milestones. We can add open PRs to that so we know what to merge for the next release. We might also want to think about a policy for how long we keep deprecated APIs around f.e. (1, 2, ... n releases?)