Skip to content
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

v0.7.0 #100

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Aug 31, 2021
Merged

v0.7.0 #100

merged 4 commits into from
Aug 31, 2021

Conversation

adonesky1
Copy link
Contributor

@adonesky1 adonesky1 commented Aug 31, 2021 •
edited
Loading

[0.7.0]

Changed

  • Update eth-ledger-bridge-keyring to support EIP-1559 transactions (#98, #97, #96)

@adonesky1 adonesky1 requested a review from a team as a code owner August 31, 2021 14:15
@Gudahtt
Copy link
Member

Gudahtt commented Aug 31, 2021

For future reference, I'd suggest naming release branches something different from the eventual release tag (e.g. release-[version]). Using the same name as the tag leads to ambiguity with git commands, forcing the use of the full refs/tags[release] path to check out the tag v.s. the branch, which can lead to subtle mistakes. There was a case once where we almost published a stale copy of the release branch rather than the final tag, because of this ambiguity.

Gudahtt
Gudahtt requested changes Aug 31, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@Gudahtt Gudahtt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I left a few comments with feedback. Would you mind also reviewing my two recent PRs and pulling them in when they're merged? They're quite small. It'd be nice to reduce the dependencies for this package before releasing it again.

CHANGELOG.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
CHANGELOG.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
CHANGELOG.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@adonesky1 adonesky1 force-pushed the v0.7.0 branch 2 times, most recently from f0648df to 58f452c Compare August 31, 2021 16:15
@adonesky1 adonesky1 requested a review from Gudahtt August 31, 2021 16:16
Gudahtt
Gudahtt reviewed Aug 31, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@Gudahtt Gudahtt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks! Could you add an entry for the removed dependencies as well?

Gudahtt
Gudahtt reviewed Aug 31, 2021
View reviewed changes
CHANGELOG.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@adonesky1 @Gudahtt
Update CHANGELOG.md
f248a18 
Co-authored-by: Mark Stacey <[email protected]>
Gudahtt
Gudahtt approved these changes Aug 31, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@Gudahtt Gudahtt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM!

@adonesky1 adonesky1 merged commit 12f1840 into main Aug 31, 2021
@adonesky1 adonesky1 deleted the v0.7.0 branch August 31, 2021 17:07
@Gudahtt
Copy link
Member

Gudahtt commented Aug 31, 2021

A new version of the package @metamask/eth-ledger-bridge-keyring (0.7.0) was published at 2021-08-31T18:11:39.200Z from
[redacted]. The shasum of this package was 7d80e1e3dfab91ba2b6a1a2a5e352320e948b568.

julianariel pushed a commit to block-wallet/eth-ledger-bridge-keyring that referenced this pull request Apr 27, 2022
@adonesky1 @Gudahtt
v0.7.0 (MetaMask#100)
809083b 
* v0.7.0

* feedback, actually update package version

* update changelog

* Update CHANGELOG.md

Co-authored-by: Mark Stacey <[email protected]>

Co-authored-by: Mark Stacey <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@Gudahtt Gudahtt Gudahtt approved these changes

@danjm danjm Awaiting requested review from danjm

@darkwing darkwing Awaiting requested review from darkwing

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@adonesky1 @Gudahtt