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

Add optional bincode dependency #28

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 17, 2025
Merged

Conversation

ratmice
Copy link
Collaborator

@ratmice ratmice commented Mar 17, 2025

No description provided.

Cargo.toml Outdated
[dependencies]
vob = { version=">=3.0.2", features=["serde"] }
packedvec = { version="1.0", features=["serde"] }
vob = { version=">=3.0.4" }
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we need the >=? If so, we need it on packedvec too I suppose? Or we need it on neither, and just specifying the version number is equivalent to >=?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I was just mirroring how it was, and was hoping we could remove it.

Cargo.toml Outdated
[dependencies]
vob = { version=">=3.0.2", features=["serde"] }
packedvec = { version="1.0", features=["serde"] }
vob = { version=">=3.0.4" }
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I made this one a draft primarily because I was wondering about this "version = ">=3.0.4".
Perhaps I am blind, but I couldn't find anything in the cargo docs saying that this >= implies within semver range?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Aha, I think >= means "this or later versions even with major changes". I think we should drop the >= so we are compatible with new minor, but not major, versions.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Will gladly go ahead and remove it.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fixed in ad58740 will probably want to squash.

@ltratt
Copy link
Member

ltratt commented Mar 17, 2025

Please squash.

@ratmice ratmice marked this pull request as ready for review March 17, 2025 18:02
@ratmice
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ratmice commented Mar 17, 2025

Squashed.

@ltratt ltratt added this pull request to the merge queue Mar 17, 2025
Merged via the queue into softdevteam:master with commit dcf7399 Mar 17, 2025
2 checks passed
@ratmice ratmice deleted the bincode branch March 17, 2025 18:06
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