-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
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
Rename rehydrate #1900
Rename rehydrate #1900
Conversation
🦋 Changeset is good to goLatest commit: a5e5105 We got this. This PR includes changesets to release 6 packages
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
I think this is not controversial at all, so I'm just going ahead and merging this. Feel free to leave the review comments at any time though. |
This pull request is automatically built and testable in CodeSandbox. To see build info of the built libraries, click here or the icon next to each commit SHA. Latest deployment of this branch, based on commit a5e5105:
|
eca4ab8
to
a5e5105
Compare
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ | |||
--- | |||
'@emotion/sheet': patch |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should be a major
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Technically in a regular situation - yes, this kind of a change should be a major. Ive deliberetely made it patch because this method was only added within current prerelease cycle so technically this is not a breaking change for v10 users.
I will be removing this changeset and changing the original one before landing v11 so no mention of rehydrate will be included in the final v11 changelogs.
Also - as I plan to remove this particular changeset i didnt want to trigger too high bump in the current prerelease cycle as removing it later would cause a final version to be downgraded (in comparison to one of released prereleases) and this would only cause confusion and potentially be a problem later.
I've extracted this from #1876 as this part of the change is way less controversial and shouldn't be blocked by the discussion about the rest of the stuff in that PR.