Update the Changelogs for the 1.0 Releases #1122
Conversation
|
No New Or Fixed Issues Found |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1122 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 58.17% 58.17%
=======================================
Files 197 197
Lines 13587 13587
=======================================
Hits 7904 7904
Misses 5683 5683 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
crates/bws/CHANGELOG.md
Outdated
| ### Added | ||
|
|
||
| - The ability to edit unassigned secrets with direct permissions. (#906) | ||
| - A way to opt out of state by default with the new state_opt_out key (#930) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we link to any documentation of this?
| - A way to opt out of state by default with the new state_opt_out key (#930) | |
| - A way to opt out of state with the new `state_opt_out` setting (#930) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great idea. I've brought this up with the docs team, if we can get docs made for this I can update it!
I don't think we need to hold up this PR for that, but totally fine if you want to hold it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we should change the phrasing since opt out of state by default is vague, do we by default opt out of state? But we don't have to link it to our docs.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, we currently use state by default. state_opt_out allows you to opt out of using state files. We use state files by default to help prevent the rate limit errors the user would normally run into.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm aware, but the phrasing of "A way to opt out of state by default" lacks clarity. And can be interpreted as the default behaviour is to opt out.
Since it's a behaviour change you could put the state_opt_out next to the changed item instead.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, I see what you mean. Updated in 28090fc, let me know what you think. Thanks!
coltonhurst
dismissed stale reviews from dani-garcia and tangowithfoxtrot
via
f293011
## 📔 Objective As discussed in PR #1122, add a link to our docs about the opt out change. ## ⏰ Reminders before review - Contributor guidelines followed - All formatters and local linters executed and passed - Written new unit and / or integration tests where applicable - Protected functional changes with optionality (feature flags) - Used internationalization (i18n) for all UI strings - CI builds passed - Communicated to DevOps any deployment requirements - Updated any necessary documentation (Confluence, contributing docs) or informed the documentation team ## 🦮 Reviewer guidelines <!-- Suggested interactions but feel free to use (or not) as you desire! --> - 👍 (`:+1:`) or similar for great changes - 📝 (`:memo:`) or ℹ️ (`:information_source:`) for notes or general info - ❓ (`:question:`) for questions - 🤔 (`:thinking:`) or 💭 (`:thought_balloon:`) for more open inquiry that's not quite a confirmed issue and could potentially benefit from discussion - 🎨 (`:art:`) for suggestions / improvements - ❌ (`:x:`) or⚠️ (`:warning:`) for more significant problems or concerns needing attention - 🌱 (`:seedling:`) or ♻️ (`:recycle:`) for future improvements or indications of technical debt - ⛏ (`:pick:`) for minor or nitpick changes
📔 Objective
Update the changelogs for the 1.0 releases of
bitwardenandbws.⏰ Reminders before review
team
🦮 Reviewer guidelines
:+1:) or similar for great changes:memo:) or ℹ️ (:information_source:) for notes or general info:question:) for questions:thinking:) or 💭 (:thought_balloon:) for more open inquiry that's not quite a confirmedissue and could potentially benefit from discussion
:art:) for suggestions / improvements:x:) or:warning:) for more significant problems or concerns needing attention:seedling:) or ♻️ (:recycle:) for future improvements or indications of technical debt:pick:) for minor or nitpick changes