Repository navigation
docs: make versioning labels and breaking changes prescriptive - #929
Erik Osterman (Cloud Posse) (osterman) wants to merge 3 commits into
Conversation
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JW9Go7ujHrXLWGtnmbgynt
|
Important Review skippedAuto incremental reviews are disabled on this repository. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the ⚙️ Run configuration
You can disable this status message by setting the Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info
📝 Walkthrough
Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to
|
| Check name | Status | Explanation |
|---|---|---|
| Docstring Coverage |  |
No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0… |
| Linked Issues check | |
Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request. |
| Out of Scope Changes check | |
Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request. |
| Title check | |
The title clearly and concisely describes the main documentation change: making versioning labels and breaking-change rules prescriptive. |
| Description check | |
The description directly explains the changes to versioning labels, breaking-change rules, non-breaking alternatives, and merge guidance. |
Full details: Docstring Coverage
-
Explanation
No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 0 functions across 0 files. (1 skipped: 1 unsupported.)
✨ Finishing Touches
-
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
-
- Commit to this branch
- Create a new PR
-
- Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.
Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.
…burn-in Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JW9Go7ujHrXLWGtnmbgynt
| | Label | Apply when | | ||
| | :----------- | :------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | | ||
| | `major` | The change can break an existing caller of a module at `1.0` or higher. See the rules below. | | ||
| | `minor` | The change adds a feature and does not change the plan for existing callers. Also, any change to a module that is still `0.x`. | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Regarding any change - wouldn't patch releases still apply for the stated purposes, for pre 1.0 modules?
Perhaps that should be any major change if I'm understanding correctly?
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01JW9Go7ujHrXLWGtnmbgynt
This branch was successfully deployed
2 participants
what
major,minor,patch,no-release. Maintainers must apply exactly one label.1.0or higher. This includes raising any minimum Terraform or provider version (also within the same major version) and provider major upgrades.variables-deprecated.tffallback,movedblocks, new variables that keep old behavior.0.xburn-in explanation.0.xexception and the "raise minimum versions only for a reason" guidance from doc: clarifications re: min tf/provider versions #927 into their own sections.why
CONTRIBUTING.mdand our practice usemajorfor breaking changes. Reviewers could not apply both. The milestone-driven wording is removed.references
cloudposse/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md— Versioningcloudposse-terraform-componentsare not covered here.🤖 Generated with Claude Code
https://claude.ai/code/session_01JW9Go7ujHrXLWGtnmbgynt