Skip to content

Conversation

@FND
Copy link
Contributor

@FND FND commented Nov 3, 2025

We kinda got ourselves into a tangle; see #164 (comment). Subsequent analysis resulted in consensus that the easiest way to restore a semblance of sanity would be to rewrite history:

  • archive current main branch, just in case: archive-main-v3 (for lack of a better name?)
  • archive current v3.0.0 tag, just in case: archive-v3.0.0 (for lack of a better name?)
  • fix 🏷️ v2.1.0 to avoid accidentally diverging history
  • rewrite main to include v2.1.0, restoring linear history
  • deprecate v3.0.0, declaring it a mistake in hindsight - which shouldn't be an issue because the ecosystem (i.e. plugins) had not been upgraded yet anyway
  • since we're rewriting history anyway, might as well release v2.2.0 while we're at it
  • put 🏷️ v3.0.0 on top of all that - which means the repo's version is slightly different from what's out there on npm (though the differences merely constitute enhancements and should practically be imperceptible)

breaking changes will be re-released as v4.0.0

@FND FND requested a review from moonglum November 3, 2025 09:35
@FND FND merged commit 2a19f94 into main Nov 3, 2025
3 checks passed
@FND FND deleted the main-revised branch November 3, 2025 12:52
@FND FND mentioned this pull request Nov 3, 2025
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.

2 participants