Closed renatomello closed 1 month ago
@renatomello is it here because you want to have it directly in the next release, or is it here just not to forget?
In principle, we should collect breaking changes for 0.3. I would agree that we may be a bit more lenient, but just one/two months after seems a very short notice (especially given the amount of time .draw()
has been there since...).
@renatomello is it here because you want to have it directly in the next release, or is it here just not to forget?
In principle, we should collect breaking changes for 0.3. I would agree that we may be a bit more lenient, but just one/two months after seems a very short notice (especially given the amount of time
.draw()
has been there since...).
The current warning says the change would happen in 0.2.13.
The current warning says the change would happen in 0.2.13.
Ok, I've not been careful in reviewing that...
It's a small thing, and updating broken third-party code because of that won't be a massive effort. We can make an exception...
Still, I'd like to increasingly improve our stability guarantees. We should definitely lower the number of semver exceptions abruptly, getting to zero as fast as possible...
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
Project coverage is 99.94%. Comparing base (
1675510
) to head (6d8624f
). Report is 10 commits behind head on master.
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
@stavros11 can you confirm the right behavior before I merge this?
Checklist: