8000 [Espresso] Update truth package to 1.1.3 by reidbaker · Pull Request #3358 · flutter/packages · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Skip to content

[Espresso] Update truth package to 1.1.3 #3358

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 3, 2023
Merged

[Espresso] Update truth package to 1.1.3 #3358

merged 2 commits into from
Mar 3, 2023

Conversation

reidbaker
Copy link
Contributor

Takeover from dependabot

Pre-launch Checklist

  • I read the [Contributor Guide] and followed the process outlined there for submitting PRs.
  • I read the [Tree Hygiene] wiki page, which explains my responsibilities.
  • I read and followed the [relevant style guides] and ran the auto-formatter. (Unlike the flutter/flutter repo, the flutter/packages repo does use dart format.)
  • I signed the [CLA].
  • The title of the PR starts with the name of the package surrounded by square brackets, e.g. [shared_preferences]
  • I listed at least one issue that this PR fixes in the description above.
  • I updated pubspec.yaml with an appropriate new version according to the [pub versioning philosophy], or this PR is [exempt from version changes].
  • I updated CHANGELOG.md to add a description of the change, [following repository CHANGELOG style].
  • I updated/added relevant documentation (doc comments with ///).
  • I added new tests to check the change I am making, or this PR is [test-exempt].
  • All existing and new tests are passing.

@flutter-dashboard
Copy link

It looks like this pull request may not have tests. Please make sure to add tests before merging. If you need an exemption to this rule, contact Hixie on the #hackers channel in Chat (don't just cc him here, he won't see it! He's on Discord!).

If you are not sure if you need tests, consider this rule of thumb: the purpose of a test is to make sure someone doesn't accidentally revert the fix. Ask yourself, is there anything in your PR that you feel it is important we not accidentally revert back to how it was before your fix?

Reviewers: Read the Tree Hygiene page and make sure this patch meets those guidelines before LGTMing.

@reidbaker reidbaker added override: no versioning needed Override the check requiring version bumps for most changes and removed needs tests labels Mar 2, 2023
@reidbaker
Copy link
Contributor Author

"No version change found, but the change to this package could not be verified to be exempt from version changes according to repository policy. If this is a false positive, please comment in the PR to explain why the PR is exempt,"

I think the "next" label is the correct update because this change adds limited value to end users and they should not need to pickup a new version until we add some other change.

gmackall
gmackall approved these changes Mar 2, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member
@gmackall gmackall left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@stuartmorgan-g
Copy link
Contributor

because this change adds limited value to end users

The bar we generally use for our continuous release model is not really "value to end users", but "has an effect on end users". In this case since (IIUC) api is a public dependency, this would not be exempt by policy, because package clients would be potentially impacted.

But it's a general policy, not a commandment; it's fine to use discretion. The CI check isn't to make it rigid, but to make sure people are making a deliberate decision (rather than just forgetting, which definitely happened more than you might think).

(One thing to keep in mind though is that part of the reason we moved to continuous release was that we had things happen like: someone made a change for compatibility with master for a change that wouldn't arrive on stable for several months, and didn't bump the version because there was no rush and it could wait until the next change... and then nobody changed the package for several months, and suddenly everyone was broken on stable just because we never published a fix. For a package like espresso, "later" can be a very long time; almost every change to espresso in the last year or more is either a change like this, or some mass change like an SDK update.)

@reidbaker
Copy link
Contributor Author

because this change adds limited value to end users

The bar we generally use for our continuous release model is not really "value to end users", but "has an effect on end users". In this case since (IIUC) api is a public dependency, this would not be exempt by policy, because package clients would be potentially impacted.

But it's a general policy, not a commandment; it's fine to use discretion. The CI check isn't to make it rigid, but to make sure people are making a deliberate decision (rather than just forgetting, which definitely happened more than you might think).

(One thing to keep in mind though is that part of the reason we moved to continuous release was that we had things happen like: someone made a change for compatibility with master for a change that wouldn't arrive on stable for several months, and didn't bump the version because there was no rush and it could wait until the next change... and then nobody changed the package for several months, and suddenly everyone was broken on stable just because we never published a fix. For a package like espresso, "later" can be a very long time; almost every change to espresso in the last year or more is either a change like this, or some mass change like an SDK update.)

Thank you for that clarification. Version number updated. This is a case where I don't actually have an opinion I just want to follow the existing rules.

@reidbaker reidbaker removed the override: no versioning needed Override the check requiring version bumps for most changes label Mar 3, 2023
@reidbaker reidbaker added the autosubmit Merge PR when tree becomes green via auto submit App label Mar 3, 2023
8000 @auto-submit auto-submit bot merged commit 4aedb85 into flutter:main Mar 3, 2023
sybrands-place pushed a commit to sybrands-place/packages that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2023
Merge branch 'main' into null_status_retriable
2abeeba 
* main: (3910 commits)
  [various] Align Flutter and Dart SDK constraints (flutter#3349)
  Roll Flutter from c590086 to f2f8005 (14 revisions) (flutter#3373)
  [webview_flutter] Enable warnings-as-errors on Android (flutter#3356)
  [ci] Increase Android platform test sharding (flutter#3365)
  Roll Flutter from f032a4d to c590086 (69 revisions) (flutter#3366)
  [Espresso] Update truth package to 1.1.3 (flutter#3358)
  [google_maps] Relax the Android renderer requset test (flutter#3364)
  [pigeon] Only check generated files on master (flutter#3357)
  [webview]: Bump androidx.webkit:webkit from 1.5.0 to 1.6.0 in /packages/webview_flutter/webview_flutter_android/android (flutter#3243)
  [ci+various] Partially enable javac warning checks (flutter#3293)
  [webview_flutter] Update minimum Flutter version to 3.3 and iOS 11 (flutter#3336)
  [local_auth] Update minimum Flutter version to 3.3 and iOS 11 (flutter#3335)
  [google_sign_in] Update minimum Flutter version to 3.3 and iOS 11 (flutter#3330)
  [google_maps_flutter] Update minimum Flutter version to 3.3 and iOS 11 (flutter#3329)
  [video_player] Update minimum Flutter version to 3.3 and iOS 11 (flutter#3328)
  [file_selector] Update minimum Flutter version to 3.3 and iOS 11 (flutter#3325)
  [go_router_builder] Fix the example for default values in the README (flutter#3231)
  Update annotation and espresso dependencies (flutter#3271)
  [tool] Provide a --base-branch flag (flutter#3322)
  [image_picker_android] Adds Android 13 photo picker functionality (flutter#3267)
  ...
@engine-flutter-autoroll engine-flutter-autoroll mentioned this pull request Mar 6, 2023
Closed
engine-flutter-autoroll added a commit to engine-flutter-autoroll/flutter that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2023
@engine-flutter-autoroll
4aedb85 [Espresso] Update truth package to 1.1.3 (flutter/packages#3358)
99253f8
@engine-flutter-autoroll engine-flutter-autoroll mentioned this pull request Mar 6, 2023
Merged
engine-flutter-autoroll added a commit to engine-flutter-autoroll/flutter that referenced this pull request Mar 6, 2023
@engine-flutter-autoroll
4aedb85 [Espresso] Update truth package to 1.1.3 (flutter/packages#3358)
33958d1
@reidbaker reidbaker mentioned this pull request Mar 20, 2023
Merged
10 tasks
nploi pushed a commit to nploi/packages that referenced this pull request Jul 16, 2023
@reidbaker @nploi
[Espresso] Update truth package to 1.1.3 (flutter#3358)
5b9904e 
[Espresso] Update truth package to 1.1.3
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@gmackall gmackall gmackall approved these changes

@tarrinneal tarrinneal tarrinneal approved these changes

@camsim99 camsim99 Awaiting requested review from camsim99

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
autosubmit Merge PR when tree becomes green via auto submit App p: espresso platform-android
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@reidbaker @stuartmorgan-g @gmackall @tarrinneal
0