Closed ryanlovett closed 2 years ago
Maybe this should be implemented in the form of a changelog, manually generated or otherwise. It looks like github-activity will be very useful for that.
Any objection to getting some CI going in GitHub actions? I often find that a working Dockerfile is way more useful than a readme when trying to build something.
I could try put something together and create an MR.
On Tue, 30 Nov 2021 at 23:41, Ryan Lovett @.***> wrote:
Maybe this should be implemented in the form of a changelog, manually generated or otherwise.
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/jupyterhub/jupyter-rsession-proxy/issues/111#issuecomment-983045750, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADGPYN4ZCQYWLR4YWY47M7TUOVAI7ANCNFSM5JC2HLNA .
@riazarbi Yes, it'd be great if you could add some automated testing in CI! Can you please create a new issue for that? If you'd like inspiration, jupyter-server-proxy uses GitHub actions to run tests.
We used to include an example Dockerfile, but now reference rocker's binder docker image in the README. (here)
Fixed by #112.
We should make a new release following the merge of #98 and #110. We can bump to version 1.5
1.4, which is apropos since-- we are now compatible with rstudio server 1.4 and their newer date-based versioning.This is just a coincidence -- we don't set our version based on rstudio server's.We now require jupyter-server-proxy 3.2.0.
Also notable is that we removed the check for the RSESSION_PROXY_RSTUDIO_1_4 environment variable. My feeling is that people who need rstudio server <= 1.3 (or one of the earlier 1.4 releases) can stay with jupyter-rsession-proxy 1.3.
My feeling is that it is sufficient to mention this in the README, but does anyone else feel otherwise?
Edit: we are already at version 1.4!