Skip to content

Conversation

@phil-davis
Copy link
Contributor

@phil-davis phil-davis commented Mar 13, 2023

Description

git checkout release-10.12.0
git checkout -b merge-back-10.12.0
git push --set-upstream origin merge-back-10.12.0

I made a separate branch name from the current release-10.12.0 branch to do this merge-back. When PRs are merged, GitHub automagically deletes the PR branch, and I don't really want the "real" release-10.12.0 branch to accidentally get deleted.

How Has This Been Tested?

CI

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Database schema changes (next release will require increase of minor version instead of patch)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
  • Technical debt
  • Tests only (no source changes)

Checklist:

  • Code changes
  • Unit tests added
  • Acceptance tests added
  • Documentation ticket raised:
  • Changelog item, see TEMPLATE

jnweiger and others added 26 commits February 25, 2023 10:56
This is mainly for streams that don't wrap another one, or use
a stream not provided by the native fopen function such as
smbclient_open
Signed-off-by: Michiel de Jong <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Michiel de Jong <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Michiel de Jong <[email protected]>
Upgrading phpseclib/phpseclib (3.0.18 => 3.0.19)
revert logic to expose free_space, but keep availableStorage config
* [tx] updated from transifex

* [tx] updated from transifex

* make getFrom configurable

* fix style

* Adjust unit tests for MailNotificationsTest

* add changelog

* Document remove_sender_display_name system setting

* Add unit test cases for when remove_sender_display_name is set to true

---------

Co-authored-by: ownClouders <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Phil Davis <[email protected]>
@update-docs
Copy link

update-docs bot commented Mar 13, 2023

Thanks for opening this pull request! The maintainers of this repository would appreciate it if you would create a changelog item based on your changes.

@phil-davis phil-davis requested a review from jnweiger March 13, 2023 21:07
@phil-davis phil-davis marked this pull request as ready for review March 13, 2023 21:07
@owncloud owncloud deleted a comment from ownclouders Mar 13, 2023
@owncloud owncloud deleted a comment from ownclouders Mar 13, 2023
@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

93.3% 93.3% Coverage
0.0% 0.0% Duplication

Copy link
Contributor

@jnweiger jnweiger left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for the PR.
This is next on my checklist :-)

Do we want to keep the release-10.12.0 branch around?

@jnweiger jnweiger merged commit 0d817c8 into master Mar 13, 2023
@delete-merged-branch delete-merged-branch bot deleted the merge-back-10.12.0 branch March 13, 2023 22:36
@phil-davis
Copy link
Contributor Author

Do we want to keep the release-10.12.0 branch around?

It won't hurt for now. But I suppose that if we need to make 10.12.1 then we would create that branch from the 10.12.0 release tag or...

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.

7 participants