Replies: 4 comments 12 replies
-
I think that one of the reasons why we didn't want to use that format is that, if for any kind of reasons, the suffixes are lost, we risk to release version But a part for this constraints/extra care we should put into the scritps, I personally don't see other problems. I also like the fact that it will be closer to the RCs we actually release, closing a little bit the gap on the versions checks at least. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
A few thoughts: 1
I'm not sure I follow what you mean, but if it's 2Going for this 0.XX version would put more pressure in having the minor bumped in 3React also uses the 0.0.0 format for experimental, which is basically what nightlies are. Why can't we keep the 4
I'm not sure I'm following, how is |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I'm going to go ahead with this change and re-name. I'll give a heads-up to Expo who I know is using it in their nightly CI |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
We've renamed the react-native nightlies to the convention we've discussed. Closing! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Right now the
react-native
nightly is named like so:0.0.0-20230413-2147-7d7f48da4 of the format
0.0.0-date-commit
.I'm wondering if we should instead name our nightlies to be more descriptive of the version they represent.
Proposing
0.73.0-nightly-date-commit
React does something like this for their
next
version. Checking with SemVer calculator, these nightly versions would be ignored in the ranges.Part of the reason I'm proposing this is because we want to publish nightly versions of some of our other packages that
react-native
depends on. Having them all aligned like this would bring clarity to dealing with dependencies.Thoughts?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions