Revert prebump version change, stop passing packageInfos#1333
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
On further thought, it's debatable which version
prebumpought to receive: that behavior was included in the tests of the original PR #608 (granted may have been a copy-paste), and it's conceivable that someone might want to know which version the package will be bumped to before the bump is written to disk.This PR reverts to the old behavior with clearer documentation (reverting the fix(?) of #1116).
It also stops implicitly passing
packageInfosas a 4th argument toprebumpand throws an error if its usage is detected. That argument was never intended to be used, and the temptation of having it there is for users to try to modify it, which may have unintended side effects. If you were usingprebumpthat way, please open an issue and we can figure out a better alternative.(The
prebumphook has no usage that I could find in a github search, so I would have just removed it--but of course it's being used internally, in a reasonable manner in at least one case.)Also clean up some old change files.