Write docs for v12.2.0 minor release

[wolfgangwalther]

Write docs for v12.2.0 minor release

[wolfgangwalther]

To be precise:

• 12.1 is the development version (uneven minor, no patch)
• 12.2.0 is the proper release (even minor, including patch)

[laurenceisla]

• Deprecated: Prefer: params=single-object is deprecated. Use a function with a single unnamed JSON parameter instead. - @steve-chavez

I think this is already documented? I can see the deprecation notices in:

• https://postgrest.org/en/latest/references/api/functions.html#functions-with-a-single-unnamed-json-parameter, as a Warning at the end of the section.
• https://postgrest.org/en/latest/references/api/preferences.html#single-json-object-as-function-parameter, as a Warning at the start of the section

[wolfgangwalther]

Also, I think the next minor should be 12.1.0, since the latest release was 12.0.3 . Unless I'm missing something, postgrest-release should use the current version in postgrest.cabal for a minor release.

No, we agreed that uneven minor releases are the on-going development version.

So the current development version is 12.1. We are going to release 12.2 - and at the same time we switch the main branch to the new development version 12.3. That's all hardcoded in the postgrest-release tool already.

[wolfgangwalther]

I think we can do a new minor release now. @wolfgangwalther Should just doing postgrest-release be enough?

I still want to check this TODO here:

Add "pg version last supported by pgrst version X" and maybe "support for pg version Y will be removed in next version of pgrst" hints on startup as discussed in #2052 (comment).

So yeah, now it's on me.

---

I wonder why it didn't find the remote, I have:

Ah my remotes end in .git and I assume this would always be the case:

upstream	[email protected]:PostgREST/postgrest.git (fetch)
upstream	[email protected]:PostgREST/postgrest.git (push)

I will change the script accordingly.

[wolfgangwalther]

I still want to check this TODO here:

If we do #2052, then the next version should be a major one right? Not opposed if that's the case.

Yes - I would that right after we released the next minor.

[laurenceisla]

I think this is already documented? I can see the deprecation notices in:

Ah, the link from the changelog is not working anymore though. Fixing in #3552

[steve-chavez]

I think we can do a new minor release now. @wolfgangwalther Should just doing postgrest-release be enough?

I just executed it and got:

Current version is 12.1
Updating postgrest.cabal ...
Updating CHANGELOG.md ...
Committing ...
Current version is 12.2.0
Updating postgrest.cabal ...
Committing (devel bump)...
Remote not found. Please push manually ...

I wonder why it didn't find the remote, I have:

git remote -v | grep PostgREST/postgrest
upstream        [email protected]:PostgREST/postgrest (fetch)
upstream        [email protected]:PostgREST/postgrest (push)

[laurenceisla]

Also, I think the next minor should be 12.1.0, since the latest release was 12.0.3 . Unless I'm missing something, postgrest-release should use the current version in postgrest.cabal for a minor release.

[laurenceisla]

No, we agreed that uneven minor releases are the on-going development version.

Ah, got it, it seems that I missed that.

[steve-chavez]

I still want to check this TODO here:

If we do #2052, then the next version should be a major one right? Not opposed if that's the case.

[steve-chavez]

Yes - I would that right after we released the next minor.

Ok cool. So then I think we can release the minor now right?

[wolfgangwalther]

Ok cool. So then I think we can release the minor now right?

It depends. If you agree that I can do #2052 afterwards - fine.

In #2052 (comment) we discussed about adding the "this PG version will not be supported in the next major version"-deprecation-style check. This is the TODO I referenced here:

I still want to check this TODO here:

I was under the impression, that you agreed on doing #2052 with the condition that we add this. If so, we'd need to do that before we do the minor. If you're fine without this condition - we can go ahead with the minor release now.

[steve-chavez]

It depends. If you agree that I can do #2052 afterwards - fine.

For sure, I agree with that.

In #2052 (comment) we discussed about adding the "this PG version will not be supported in the next major version"-deprecation-style check. This is the TODO I referenced here:

Oh ok. So we need to add a deprecation plus update this section here?