Skip to content

Conversation

@Kircheneer
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes #84

@glennmatthews
Copy link
Collaborator

I'm curious as to whether this should be considered a breaking change - i.e. are there any existing users of the library that rely on the current truthiness behavior?

@Kircheneer
Copy link
Contributor Author

As discussed this really should warrant a major version increase and as such will have to be delayed until we have more breaking changes.

@Kircheneer Kircheneer self-assigned this Jun 29, 2022
@Kircheneer Kircheneer added this to the 2.0.0 milestone Jun 29, 2022
@Kircheneer Kircheneer changed the base branch from develop to next-2.0 August 18, 2023 17:28
@Kircheneer Kircheneer requested a review from chadell as a code owner August 18, 2023 17:28
@Kircheneer Kircheneer mentioned this pull request Jan 22, 2024
7 tasks
@Kircheneer Kircheneer mentioned this pull request Jan 22, 2024
2 tasks
@Kircheneer Kircheneer closed this Feb 15, 2024
@jdrew82 jdrew82 deleted the lk-#84 branch March 27, 2025 22:36
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Empty DiffSync instance evaluates as false

2 participants