Identify breaking features in 6.0.0 #1319
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Pull Request
I didn't identify which items in v6.0.0 would be breaking for some users.
Problem
People who managed to use short-only flags despite it not being well supported will be broken by change in behaviour with case of option property. #1318
People who were not aware of option name clash or worked around clash will be broken by new throw. #1308
Solution
Add Breaking and extra detail to CHANGELOG for 6.0.0
We could merge this straight to master so it appears in CHANGELOG, or leave it on develop until we do next code change. I like in theory the master branch having same revision as the npm release, but don't think it makes a practical difference so I am leaning towards merge to master? I'll update the Release Notes when merged either way.