Closed Yasumoto closed 5 years ago
Ah, dang. I thought the SPM versioning system would cover us there. Another option would be to publish a 1.x
for NIO 1 and go directly to 2.x
for NIO 2. Happy to hear anyone's thoughts.
Ooh, smart. I like the 1.x
for NIO 1.x
and 2.x
for NIO 2.x
, especially since it matches that versioning. Other benefit is we keep the early-days history intact.
@MrLotU / @Yasumoto but from: 0.0.0-alpha.1
means 0.0.0-alpha.1 ..< 1.0.0
so that you would get a 0.3.0
(if released) is correct, right?
Yeah, this is the problem right now. I already had a 0.3.0
released previously. But right now users should get 0.0.0-alpha.1
not 0.3.0
since it's newer.
@MrLotU why not 1.0.0-alpha.1
then?
or 0.4.0-alpha.1
We have that too, for the NIO 2 supported version :)
:)
0.4.0-alpha.1
would work. But I think 0.3.0
-> 0.4.0-alpha.1
will have some breaking changes
But I think
0.3.0
->0.4.0-alpha.1
will have some breaking changes
As per SemVer that's okay for 0.x
stuff, also already you have 0.0.0-alpha.1 --> 0.3.0
with breaking changes, right?
Ah, yeah. I think that's the easiest way to resolve this for now then. I'll publish 0.4.0-alpha.1
:)
Best of all worlds, thanks friends!
0.4.0-alpha.1
released. @Yasumoto could you please check if updating to from: "0.4.0-alpha.1
works and if so, close this issue? 😄
Yep! Updated https://github.com/vapor-community/VaporMonitoring/pull/5 and working a-ok 👌 🎉
Steps to reproduce
Specify this in your
Package.swift
and you'll pull in version
0.3.0
.I know mucking with published git tags isn't ideal, but maybe we should delete the old
0.3.0
releases and rename them to something that won't collide with the NIO1-supported tags? 🤔Expected behavior
We get "mainline"
0.0.0
versions.