Cut 0.1.0-alpha.0#102
Conversation
|
👋 Thanks for assigning @tnull as a reviewer! |
tankyleo
force-pushed
the
2026-06-v0.1.0-alpha.1
branch
3 times, most recently
from
e8fa92e to
a064d1d
Compare
tankyleo
force-pushed
the
2026-06-v0.1.0-alpha.1
branch
from
a064d1d to
dbb585c
Compare
tnull
left a comment
tnull
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Two minor comments on the changelog, and starting with -alpha.1 is a bit uncommon, otherwise looks good.
| default-members = ["server"] | ||
|
|
||
| [workspace.package] | ||
| version = "0.1.0-alpha.1" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: -alpha.1 is usually the second alpha release, as -alpha or alpha.0 is usually the first.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sounds good I'll use alpha.0
|
|
||
| Initial alpha release of the Versioned Storage Service server. | ||
|
|
||
| This release is source-only; no crates.io packages, prebuilt binaries, or Docker images are published. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This doesn't belong in a CHANGELOG, especially since package publication would happen after this is merged anyways (and we should publish to crates.io, no?)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we were to publish vss-server to crates.io, as far as I see this would also require us to publish the path-dependencies in this workspace, api, auth-impls, and impls.
Two options from here: 1) publish the path-dependencies to crates.io, 2) fold the path dependencies into a single crate.
I was not excited by either of them yesterday, but we can discuss further let me know what you think.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the issue with 1) (we might need to rename the crates to something unique, but other than that)?
- would also be an option, IMO, but we could still consider moving
vss-clientinto this repo and then it could maybe reuseapior other crates in its tests if we keep it separate?
Generally I think we should publish to crates.io latest with 0.1 final.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the issue with 1) (we might need to rename the crates to something unique, but other than that)?
I think I'd prefer this option to highlight the modularity of VSS-server.
Generally I think we should publish to crates.io latest with 0.1 final.
Ah do you mean we do not publish for this initial alpha release ?
|
|
||
| ## Added | ||
|
|
||
| - VSS service implementing VSS protocol version 0. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would keep this more succinct as it's just "what happened so far". For changelog-style entries we'd otherwise want to highling specific features/bugfixes and link to specific PRs for further reference.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would keep this more succinct as it's just "what happened so far"
Can you give an example of the wording you have in mind ? Thank you sounds to me the exact line above is indeed "what's happened so far" ?
For changelog-style entries we'd otherwise want to highling specific features/bugfixes and link to specific PRs for further reference.
Happy to add the PR numbers yes. As for features/bug fixes isn't that what we've got below currently ? Or do you rather have in mind a brief description on a newline for each PR up to this point ?
3 participants
No description provided.