Closed Adi8712 closed 6 months ago
Name | Link |
---|---|
Latest commit | e58fdc4df1fc1d6fd605a643c87bfe2dc2279378 |
Latest deploy log | https://app.netlify.com/sites/merch-site/deploys/6621047a6baec800080576b6 |
Deploy Preview | https://deploy-preview-162--merch-site.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.
@Adi8712 SInce generally we are after the release so shouldnt it be > v1.0.0 ?
There's been no release as of yet so I assumed we'll test it and then go ahead with release v1
@Priyansh61 I have set the version to 1.0.1 and emptied the changelog.md file
Use npm run release
and it should work
@arminpatel The way I planned it after seeing the issue is using release-it as a dedicated tool for handling releases and in future automating release-it using GitHub actions. Although GitHub actions can help automate literally anything using a dedicated tool for releases seems more flexible and easier I guess.
@arminpatel The way I planned it after seeing the issue is using release-it as a dedicated tool for handling releases and in future automating release-it using GitHub actions. Although GitHub actions can help automate literally anything using a dedicated tool for releases seems more flexible and easier I guess.
The way I see it, assuming both methods provide the same functionality, using actions would remove unnecessary code from the project, save extra setup steps for the contributors.
@Priyansh61 wdyt?
@arminpatel The way I planned it after seeing the issue is using release-it as a dedicated tool for handling releases and in future automating release-it using GitHub actions. Although GitHub actions can help automate literally anything using a dedicated tool for releases seems more flexible and easier I guess.
The way I see it, assuming both methods provide the same functionality, using actions would remove unnecessary code from the project, save extra setup steps for the contributors.
@Priyansh61 wdyt?
Yup!! Ig @arminpatel pointed out the right thing it would be better to get more things off from the local setup and try to get things more in automation.. So I believe using GH actions would be much better.
@Priyansh61 @arminpatel I looked into it and found GH Release. I guess this'll do, my only question is how do I take care of the GitHub token, I can set it up for my fork but someone has to do it for this repo as well I guess.
@Priyansh61 @arminpatel I looked into it and found GH Release. I guess this'll do, my only question is how do I take care of the GitHub token, I can set it up for my fork but someone has to do it for this repo as well I guess.
I would add the token needed, message me the details. Also can you explore other gh actions? We don't need to make releases just automated versioning is enough
Overview
Proof that changes are correct