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

fix: update pagination statusLabel type to ContentNode #1099

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 4, 2023
Merged

Conversation

Bracciata
Copy link
Contributor

@Bracciata Bracciata commented Jun 22, 2023

BREAKING CHANGE: update pagination statusLabel type to ContentNode
This closes #958

We need to discuss how to handle this change because as mentioned in the issue it is a breaking change.

@Bracciata Bracciata requested a review from a team as a code owner June 22, 2023 16:35
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Preview branch generated at https://fix-958.d1gko6en628vir.amplifyapp.com

@Bracciata Bracciata changed the title fix: made pagination's statusLabel's type ContentNode fix: update pagination's statusLabel's type to ContentNode Jun 22, 2023
@Bracciata Bracciata changed the title fix: update pagination's statusLabel's type to ContentNode BREAKING CHANGE: update pagination's statusLabel's type to ContentNode Jun 22, 2023
Copy link
Member

@scurker scurker left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This cannot land without a deprecation period according to our contributing guidelines:

Before a breaking change can be released, the breaking change should be documented with the component, property, or style being changed getting flagged as Deprecated. This could mean warning the consumer that a component or property is now deprecated, or including a deprecated comment next to a css class name. This deprecation must exist for at least two months. If a change is additive (e.g. making a new property required), the new property must be optional until the deprecation period has passed.

I'm not 100% sure how we address this given it's a type change but it cannot land with our current guidelines.

@Bracciata
Copy link
Contributor Author

I am also unsure how to handle it. Maybe we could adjust the name of the prop and recommend future uses utilize the new name? I know that is likely not ideal especially if it is used in other parts of the repository.

@Bracciata Bracciata changed the title BREAKING CHANGE: update pagination's statusLabel's type to ContentNode BREAKING CHANGE: update pagination statusLabel type to ContentNode Jun 26, 2023
@Bracciata Bracciata changed the title BREAKING CHANGE: update pagination statusLabel type to ContentNode fix!: update pagination statusLabel type to ContentNode Jun 26, 2023
@scurker scurker changed the title fix!: update pagination statusLabel type to ContentNode fix: update pagination statusLabel type to ContentNode Aug 2, 2023
@scurker
Copy link
Member

scurker commented Aug 2, 2023

After further consideration, I'm going err on the side of this not being a breaking change. Someone who is passing in null or undefined for a property intended to display a label is very likely a mistake and not a use case we would want to support for backwards compatibility anyway.

@scurker scurker merged commit ade57cc into develop Aug 4, 2023
2 checks passed
@scurker scurker deleted the fix-958 branch August 4, 2023 21:05
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Aug 4, 2023

Preview branch generated at https://fix-958.d1gko6en628vir.amplifyapp.com

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.

Pagination statusLabel prop should be more restrictive
2 participants