Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Aug 10, 2026. It is now read-only.

Release/1.2 - #843

Merged
QuintinWillison merged 14 commits into
masterfrom
release/1.2
Apr 1, 2020
Merged

Release/1.2#843
QuintinWillison merged 14 commits into
masterfrom
release/1.2

Conversation

@QuintinWillison

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Make 1.2 the current version, ensuring that 1.1 versions are accessible (where applicable).

@mattheworiordan
mattheworiordan temporarily deployed to ably-docs-staging-pr-843 March 23, 2020 17:28 Inactive
@mattheworiordan
mattheworiordan temporarily deployed to ably-docs-staging-pr-843 March 23, 2020 18:05 Inactive
@mattheworiordan
mattheworiordan temporarily deployed to ably-docs-staging-pr-843 March 23, 2020 19:25 Inactive
@mattheworiordan
mattheworiordan temporarily deployed to ably-docs-staging-pr-843 March 23, 2020 19:42 Inactive
@mattheworiordan
mattheworiordan temporarily deployed to ably-docs-staging-pr-843 March 25, 2020 12:20 Inactive
@QuintinWillison
QuintinWillison marked this pull request as ready for review March 30, 2020 06:20
Quintin Willison added 13 commits March 30, 2020 09:25
Command used, from content/client-lib-development-guide:
git diff v1.1-as-amended:./features.textile ./features.textile > ./versions/features-1-1__1-2.diff
…lative to root.
I had accidentally asked nanoc to compile the site from a sub-folder but it took me a while to work out that this had created a transitory crash.log file for me in that folder. It's easier for developers to spot this kind of mistake if they'll see a new file pop up in that scenario.

@SimonWoolfSimonWoolf 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.

Note that the v=1.2 with sse examples won't work until we make that change in realtime to make them work. And also reactor events currently default to v=1.0, not 1.2.

@QuintinWillison

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Thanks @SimonWoolf - I guess this ties in with #845 which I think I'll get merged first anyway, given it amends docs repository state for 1.1.

What goes first at this stage in terms of getting those realtime changes made, if in light of @mattheworiordan's #845 PR they still need to be made? Can we get this release merged to bleeding edge docs via master branch or should the realtime changes be made first, if they are to be made at all? And if they are not going to be made then presumably I need to revert some of the changes I made in this PR.

@mattheworiordan
mattheworiordan temporarily deployed to ably-docs-staging-pr-843 March 31, 2020 14:45 Inactive
@QuintinWillison
QuintinWillison merged commit 0ca060f into masterApr 1, 2020
@QuintinWillison
QuintinWillison deleted the release/1.2 branch April 1, 2020 10:51
@tcard

tcard commented Apr 1, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@QuintinWillison Shouldn't this be deployed to docs.ably.io?

@QuintinWillison

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Hi @tcard. Yes, it's live. Happens automatically once it lands on master branch.

@tcard

tcard commented Apr 1, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I commented because I was seeing 1.1 on docs.ably.io, but refreshing fixed that, so I guess it was cached or something. Sorry for the noise.

@SimonWoolf

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

As discussed on slack the diff is wrong, looks like it's from 1.1-as-amended to 1.2 when it should be from 1.1 to 1.2 - ie should include all the changes that have been added to the 1.1 spec since its initial release, which are required for 1.2 compliance per https://github.com/ably/docs/#branch-and-tag-scheme-for-features-spec.

Apologies for not picking up on this during my PR review on monday

x-ably-message-id: {UNIQUE_ABLY_MESSAGE_ID}
x-ably-message-timestamp: {TIMESTAMP_ORIGINAL_MESSAGE_WAS_SENT}
x-ably-version: 1.0
x-ably-version: 1.2

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.

@SimonWoolf is this correct? Will the Reactor rules use a 1.2 now?

@SimonWoolfSimonWoolfApr 1, 2020

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.

Not yet, as I mentioned in my review of this pr. I'm planning to change the default for new rules, per the new versioning policy. (TBH I still think this change is unnecessary and that changing the version without there being any actual difference is confusing to customers, but I've already lost that argument 🙂)

- x-ably-envelope-appid := the "app ID":https://support.ably.io/support/solutions/articles/3000063083 which the message came from
- content-type := the type of the payload. This will be @application/json@ or @application/x-msgpack@
- x-ably-version := the version of Reactor Event. At present this should be @1.0@, though older Events will be @0.8@
- x-ably-version := the version of Reactor Event. At present this should be @1.2@

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.

As above...


```[javascript]
var querystring = 'v=1.1&channels={{RANDOM_CHANNEL_NAME}}&rewind=1&key={{API_KEY}}';
var querystring = 'v=1.2&channels={{RANDOM_CHANNEL_NAME}}&rewind=1&key={{API_KEY}}';

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.

Does SSE suport 1.2?

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.

Not yet, as I mentioned in my review of this pr

@mattheworiordan

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I am afraid we have an issue here with this PR in that we've effectively skipped a version now in the docs:

screenshot_2020-04-01_11-28-54_pm

This is important because if someone is now using 1.1, what docs do they refer to? The process we followed before was to simply copy the files into a 1.1 versions folder, and voila, you magically have 1.1.

We need to do this I am afraid.

Also, this has been merged in master, which means if anyone now merges other changes in the docs repo (@fliptopbox is doing work on tutorials), we will now be showing 1.2 on the website. Did we intend to do that before we actually release 1.2 libraries?

What's the plan for release of all 1.2 libraries too i.e. we should bump all libraries I assume to 1.2 even if they don't necessarily change so that we have a set of 1.2 libraries, and the features doc is updated to confirm what features are missing from which libs for 1.2 specific things.

@QuintinWillison

QuintinWillison commented Apr 6, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@mattheworiordan can you please be specific regarding your statement "we've effectively skipped a version now in the docs". For what I was able to work out from inspecting the existing repository, the commits going towards the previous 1.1 release by @tomczoink, the Ruby 'versions helper' code in this repository and from adhoc input I've had from @SimonWoolf my work to get us to a state of having docs ready for 1.2 was complete. So what did I miss?

Your example screenshot above is from a page that did not need to change between 1.0 and 1.2 docs - so why do you assert it needs an entry in the drop down for 1.1?

Screenshot 2020-04-06 at 06 46 53

The only two pages that have changed are channel params:

Screenshot 2020-04-06 at 06 47 17

and the features spec:

Screenshot 2020-04-06 at 06 47 04

I don't know what more work needs doing on this repository so can you either be more specific about what work still remains or perhaps push some commits yourself, please?

FYI, @paddybyers

@mattheworiordan

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Moving this conversation out of here as there is an open issue #854

Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@QuintinWillison@tcard@SimonWoolf@mattheworiordan