Skip to content
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 v0.3.0 #75

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jul 17, 2020
Merged

Conversation

larkox
Copy link
Contributor

@larkox larkox commented Jun 5, 2020

Summary

Bump version to v0.3.0

Proposal to bump Minor Version to prep for release with the following Release Notes:

Enhancements

Fixes

Others

Ticket Link

None

@larkox larkox added 2: Dev Review Requires review by a core committer 3: QA Review Requires review by a QA tester labels Jun 5, 2020
@larkox larkox requested review from levb and jfrerich June 5, 2020 11:48
@larkox
Copy link
Contributor Author

larkox commented Jun 5, 2020

We have pending these two PRs, but since we might be adding a new version soon, we can squish them in the next bump.
#73 Audit fix
#74 Go mod tidy

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Jun 5, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #75 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@          Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #75   +/-   ##
======================================
  Coverage    0.00%   0.00%           
======================================
  Files           8       8           
  Lines         858     856    -2     
======================================
+ Misses        858     856    -2     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
server/command.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 889ce94...713a217. Read the comment docs.

@hanzei hanzei added this to the v0.3.0 milestone Jun 5, 2020
@jfrerich jfrerich removed the 2: Dev Review Requires review by a core committer label Jun 6, 2020
@jfrerich jfrerich requested a review from DHaussermann June 6, 2020 19:36
@hanzei
Copy link
Contributor

hanzei commented Jun 8, 2020

Maybe #69 should also go into this release as it's an awesome UX improvement.

@larkox
Copy link
Contributor Author

larkox commented Jun 8, 2020

@hanzei If it is merged before the release, we will squish it. If not, as soon as it is merged we will prepare a new bump.

@larkox
Copy link
Contributor Author

larkox commented Jun 9, 2020

Added three commits to the changelog on an others section. Mainly commits that are not fixes nor enhancements, but more related with repo maintenance. Not sure whether these should be added here, not added at all, or what to do with them.

@hanzei hanzei changed the title Bump version to 0.3.0 Release v0.3.0 Jun 16, 2020
@DHaussermann
Copy link

Sorry for the delay on this @larkox the PRs listed can be merged so we can release test now for the version bump..

@hanzei
Copy link
Contributor

hanzei commented Jun 18, 2020

@DHaussermann This is ready for a final review.

@larkox
Copy link
Contributor Author

larkox commented Jun 18, 2020

Updated comment with all new commits merged.

@DHaussermann
Copy link

DHaussermann commented Jun 18, 2020

Release testing was completed. There are a couple issues found:

  1. Plugin does not error gracefully when expecting a username that is not provided #83 is an edge case but it is a new regression and crashes the plugin. (may need help from @iomodo)
  2. Permalink are not rendered in DM posts when a ToDo is received created via MM post #84 is relatively minor and not a regression.

cc @larkox

@larkox
Copy link
Contributor Author

larkox commented Jul 6, 2020

@DHaussermann All pending issues have been merged and the description has been updated with the latest commits.

@DHaussermann
Copy link

/update-branch

@larkox
Copy link
Contributor Author

larkox commented Jul 13, 2020

We might be waiting for #90 .
Personally, I have no problem in releasing v0.3.0 as it is, and bumping a new release when that is in place, but since the main overhead will be on QA side, I will defer this decision to @DHaussermann

@DHaussermann
Copy link

@aaronrothschild I can run through release tests if we want to ship this. My impression was that we were going to follow-up on if it's acceptable to deploy this as is or if we want a flag to hide the team side bar UI options.
Thoughts?

Copy link

@DHaussermann DHaussermann left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Tested and passed.

  • Release testing already done for 3.0
  • Issue found have been resolved
  • Briefly smoke tested again
  • Version displayed correctly
    LGTM!

@DHaussermann DHaussermann added 4: Reviews Complete All reviewers have approved the pull request and removed 3: QA Review Requires review by a QA tester labels Jul 16, 2020
@DHaussermann
Copy link

#90 moved to v0.4.0 after team discussion.

@larkox larkox merged commit 43c3c30 into mattermost-community:master Jul 17, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
4: Reviews Complete All reviewers have approved the pull request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants