-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 119
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 a 2.2.3 version from the 2.x branch and not from the 3.x branch as for the 2.2.2 version #80
Comments
@bsautel Do you plan on releasing the 3.x branch anytime soon? It (i.e. 2.2.2) works well here (except for those two issues, which we have mitigated), and we have a pretty large multi project. |
Glad to hear it works not so bad! This version will break backward compatibility (because of Kotlin rewrite). And we want to take advantage of the opportunity to change other things that require a compatibility break. Here are a few tasks I think about:
|
My bad, I'd tested the kotlin rewrite with a few different project and while that and the test suite worked fine that obviously didn't catch nearly enough. 2.2.3 is available on the plugin portal now |
Thanks @deepy for the release. I cherry picked the 2.2.3 release commit to the master branch so that the README from the master branch shows the right production version to use. Have a nice week-end! |
@bsautel How about releasing a 3.x milestone version or something? It would be nice to follow the kotlin version of this. Then I wouldn't have to do ...
... anymore. With the 3.x branch I can do this instead:
|
We can probably fix that in both editions, we were previously only accepting a |
The 2.2.2 version was released from the master branch (which contains the Kotlin rewrite). It breaks the backward compatibility, it's the reason why multiple regressions are reported (#72 or #76).
We should release a 2.2.3 based on the 2.x branch including a cherry-pick of #68 that was added to the 2.2.1, but not all the Kotlin rewrite.
@deepy, I am going to make the cherry-pick of #68 to the of the 2.x branch. I'll tell you when it's done.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: