-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 192
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Release 180.0.0 #4548
Release 180.0.0 #4548
Conversation
Removed dependencies detected. Learn more about Socket for GitHub ↗︎ 🚮 Removed packages: npm/@metamask/[email protected], npm/@metamask/[email protected] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Satisfied with the notifications side (@metamask/notification-services-controller
, @metamask/profile-sync-controller
)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Had some suggestions!
@@ -7,6 +7,14 @@ and this project adheres to [Semantic Versioning](https://semver.org/spec/v2.0.0 | |||
|
|||
## [Unreleased] | |||
|
|||
### Changed |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Are we releasing this package? If not, should we add these changelog entries in another PR?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To include the changes in #4556, I added releases for:
ens-controller
(a3308b8)gas-fee-controller
(ac917f0)selected-network-controller
,queued-request-controller
61670f3transaction-controller
,user-operation-controller
773baa3
Every package with a diff in this PR is now being released (excluding json-rpc-engine
).
- Upgrade TypeScript to v5.0 and set `moduleResolution` option to `Node16` ([#3645](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/3645)) | ||
- Bump `@metamask/base-controller` from `^6.0.0` to `^6.0.2` ([#4517](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/4517), [#4544](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/4544)) | ||
- Bump `@metamask/snaps-controllers` from `^8.1.1` to `^9.3.1` ([#3645](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/3645)) | ||
- Bump peerDependency `@metamask/snaps-controllers` from `^8.1.1` to `^9.3.0` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If we are bumping a peer dependency then this is a breaking change as the client will also need to upgrade this dependency. Should we bump this package to 0.2.0?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Prithpal-Sooriya How would you feel about using a minor version bump to indicate that there are breaking changes in the release?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Upgraded both {notifications-services,profile-sync}-controller
to 0.2.0
: f842953
@Prithpal-Sooriya Let me know if this goes against the team's intentions. I can simply revert that commit.
- Bump `@metamask/snaps-sdk` from `^4.2.0` to `^6.1.1` ([#3645](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/3645), [#4547](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/4547)) | ||
- Bump `@metamask/snaps-utils` from `^7.4.0` to `^7.8.1` ([#3645](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/3645), [#4547](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/4547)) | ||
- Bump `@metamask/utils` from `^8.3.0` to `^9.1.0` ([#4516](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/4516), [#4529](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/4529)) | ||
- Bump peerDependency `@metamask/snaps-controllers` from `^8.1.1` to `^9.3.0` ([#3645](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/3645)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If we're bumping a peer dependency by a major then this would be a breaking change as it forces the client to also upgrade this package. Should we bump the version to 18.0.0?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good point. Fixed here! 2e13b78
Hi there! @MajorLift |
83060c1
- Bump `@metamask/snaps-controllers` from `^8.1.1` to `^9.3.1` ([#3645](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/3645), [#4547](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/4547)) | ||
- Bump `@metamask/snaps-sdk` from `^4.2.0` to `^6.1.1` ([#3645](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/3645), [#4547](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/4547)) | ||
- Bump `@metamask/snaps-utils` from `^7.4.0` to `^7.8.1` ([#3645](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/3645), [#4547](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/4547)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@MetaMask/accounts-engineers Should any of these be peer dependencies (esp. snaps-controllers
)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Typically the snaps controller is added as a peer dependency, for the same reason as the other controllers. I don't see the others as being used as peer deps though.
Perhaps we can move the controller to be a peer dependency later, since it's a pre-existing issue.
It's worth noting that once we have our codeowners file updated, a PR covering the same packages as this one will require 6 approvals (accounts, assets, confirmations, notifications, wallet-api-platform, wallet-framework) possibly multiple times throughout the review process. One way to make this a little less painful might be to first ask for approval from codeowners who own more packages in the PR (wallet-framework, confirmations), before pinging codeowners who own less packages. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Left a few corrections mostly minor
Co-authored-by: Mark Stacey <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
### Added | ||
|
||
- Add and export object `USER_STORAGE_SCHEMA`, function `getFeatureAndKeyFromPath`, and type `UserStoragePath` ([#4543](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/4543)) | ||
- Add `connectSnap` method to the `JwtBearerAuth` class for connecting to snap after initializing the Profile Sync SDK ([#4560](https://github.com/MetaMask/core/pull/4560)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Prithpal-Sooriya I added an entry for the new commit adding connectSnap
.
This is the release candidate for `v180.0.0`: - `@metamask/[email protected]` (major) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (major) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (patch) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (patch) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (patch) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (patch) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (patch) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (patch) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (minor) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (minor) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (patch) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (patch) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (patch) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (minor) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (major) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (major) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (patch) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (patch) - `@metamask/[email protected]` (patch) - Closes #3651 - Unblocks new releases in core. - [x] I've updated the test suite for new or updated code as appropriate - [x] I've updated documentation (JSDoc, Markdown, etc.) for new or updated code as appropriate - [x] I've highlighted breaking changes using the "BREAKING" category above as appropriate --------- Co-authored-by: Elliot Winkler <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Mark Stacey <[email protected]>
Explanation
This is the release candidate for
v180.0.0
:@metamask/[email protected]
(major)@metamask/[email protected]
(major)@metamask/[email protected]
(patch)@metamask/[email protected]
(patch)@metamask/[email protected]
(patch)@metamask/[email protected]
(patch)@metamask/[email protected]
(patch)@metamask/[email protected]
(patch)@metamask/[email protected]
(minor)@metamask/[email protected]
(minor)@metamask/[email protected]
(patch)@metamask/[email protected]
(patch)@metamask/[email protected]
(patch)@metamask/[email protected]
(minor)@metamask/[email protected]
(major)@metamask/[email protected]
(major)@metamask/[email protected]
(patch)@metamask/[email protected]
(patch)@metamask/[email protected]
(patch)References
Checklist