Skip to content

Generated v1.0 models and request builders using Typewriter - #692

Merged
Vincent Biret (baywet) merged 3 commits into
devfrom
v1.0/pipelinebuild/43180
Mar 9, 2021
Merged

Generated v1.0 models and request builders using Typewriter#692
Vincent Biret (baywet) merged 3 commits into
devfrom
v1.0/pipelinebuild/43180

Conversation

@github-actions

@github-actions github-actions Bot commented Mar 9, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This pull request was automatically created by the GitHub Action, create pull request.

The commit hash is 4c354b7.

Important Check for unexpected deletions or changes in this PR.

@baywet Vincent Biret (baywet) left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Mustafa Zengin (@zengin) Michael Mainer (@MIchaelMainer) as this is a single property addition and only comments besides that, I suggest we ditch that release to reduce consumers update pressure. Thoughts?

@baywet Vincent Biret (baywet) added this to the 2.10.0 milestone Mar 9, 2021
@MIchaelMainer

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I have mixed thoughts. Big picture, this change is inconsequential. But, someone could be waiting on the displayname property; a code comment might help someone. There is also the value in the fresh perception of a regular release cadence. I lean towards release. @mairissi for input.

@zengin

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I think regular release cadence is one of the metrics we are interested in to measure the success of generation work we are doing.

We should probably think about aligning it with metadata releases instead of weekly cadence as AGS sometimes skips publishing the metadata. I am OK with skipping documentation changes but I can imagine a world where everything is automated upon a metadata release to have the corresponding SDK release right after.

@baywet

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Michael Mainer (@MIchaelMainer) Mustafa Zengin (@zengin) alright, I'm not strongly for or against releasing. 2 out of 3 in favor, I'm happy with this democratic decision :)
I'll merge it in once #693 is merged.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants