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.

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

Use badges to redirect to a release #1037

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 6, 2024
Merged

Use badges to redirect to a release #1037

merged 3 commits into from
Nov 6, 2024

Conversation

gusinacio
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@gusinacio gusinacio requested a review from dwerner November 5, 2024 22:53
Copy link
Contributor

@carlosvdr carlosvdr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this is pretty nice , cool

@gusinacio gusinacio merged commit b6da33c into main Nov 6, 2024
9 checks passed
@gusinacio gusinacio deleted the gusinacio-patch-1 branch November 6, 2024 20:03
@fordN
Copy link
Contributor

fordN commented Nov 7, 2024

Love this automation! Thanks @gusinacio & @carlosvdr

This change the release process and directly affects very important indexer docs referenced every day, so would great to get more buy-in from everyone before merging this type of change in the future.

@gusinacio
Copy link
Member Author

Hey, thanks for letting me know about this. It became a big issue with confused indexers running older versions. At the same time, we got a thumbs-up from @trader-payne in Discord so I thought it would be good to merge.

Next time I'll bring this for more people to discuss.

@trader-payne
Copy link
Contributor

@fordN we've been talking about an automated way of pointing to the Qm hashes and versions since two years now, and even though we had discussions about ENS or using data edge subgraphs for this, nobody took actions. This is what we've come up with in the interim. I think it's a great feature and everyone I've asked so far seems pretty happy with it.

The only thing we have to keep in mind going forward is to make sure we don't create releases until things are production ready. It was the same case before anyway, so nothing really changed if you ask me.

@fordN
Copy link
Contributor

fordN commented Nov 13, 2024

Right, I'm not commenting on the solution. I love the automation. ❤️

It's just something we now have to be aware of in process (changes process and assumptions a bit), so we all need to be aware of it before executing the change.

@fordN
Copy link
Contributor

fordN commented Nov 13, 2024

@trader-payne Which I clearly stated in my original message, so I don't get why you are framing my comment as being against automation or against the solution itself or using the "nobody took action" point to justify not letting everyone know of the new process.

@trader-payne
Copy link
Contributor

Makes sense @fordN, my bad! I'm half responsible for this merge as I asked Gustavo to do it once I saw easy it was to solve the problem 😬 But yeah you're right!

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.

4 participants