Merge fork - blueprinter-ruby/blueprinter to procore-oss/blueprinter

procore-oss / blueprinter

Simple, Fast, and Declarative Serialization Library for Ruby

MIT License

1.14k stars 109 forks source link

Merge fork - blueprinter-ruby/blueprinter to procore-oss/blueprinter #327

Closed ritikesh closed 1 year ago

ritikesh commented 1 year ago

Creating this PR to merge the community fork's changes to upstream. I've synced the repos and am creating this PR as-is for now, will cleanup and make changes based on review comments. Have consolidated the contributions into a single changelog entry as well.

Checklist:

[x] I have updated the necessary documentation
[x] I have updated the changelog, if necessary (CHANGELOG.md)
[ ] I have signed off all my commits as required by DCO
[x] My build is green

jmeridth commented 1 year ago

Gotta sign your commits now. Thank you so much for bringing this back into this repo. Looking forward to more contributions.

ritikesh commented 1 year ago

@jmeridth there are commits from multiple contributors since it's a forward merge as-is. If those aren't signed, not sure how we'd go about that. I don't want to squash them into a single commit and lose meaningful independent commits. What should we do about this then? Can there not be a one-time exception?

jmeridth commented 1 year ago

We can ignore DCO for that type of scenario. Thank you for clarifying.

jmeridth commented 1 year ago

~We need to have https://github.com/procore-oss/blueprinter/pull/320 merge before this PR. To ensure rubygem gets released.~ rubygem release action is working

ritikesh commented 1 year ago

@lessthanjacob can we merge this then?

lessthanjacob commented 1 year ago

@ritikesh Let's get one more +1, but after that, we should be good to merge!

ritikesh commented 1 year ago

thanks @lessthanjacob and @jmeridth. I'll post updates on the issue and the fork regarding this as well.

ritikesh commented 1 year ago

@lessthanjacob @jmeridth - looks like release workflow isn't working? I don't see the 0.3.0 version published to Rubygems post merge

lessthanjacob commented 1 year ago

@ritikesh ~Releasing is a manual process currently.~ ~Looking into this.~ @jmeridth is working on a fix.

ritikesh commented 1 year ago

I see the release has happened but not sure if the workflow is fixed. Also, just wanted to know, how do we do communications within the maintainers?

jmeridth commented 1 year ago

@ritikesh I'll add you to the maintainers mailing list.

Yes, release fixed and 0.30.0 is available on rubygems.org.