Add Node version update process #868
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
lognaturel
requested review from
alxndrsn
and removed request for
matthew-white
|
I see a 👍 from @sadiqkhoja so I've changed the review request! |
sadiqkhoja
approved these changes
Jan 22, 2025
|
Dopamiiiiiine! Hope you got a bit too, @sadiqkhoja 😅🤘 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Follow-up from v2024.3 retrospective. In that release, we upgraded node to 22 and I had some hesitation around when it should be done and by whom.
I considered explicitly saying that I do the upgrade similar to what Collect does but I don't think it's necessary until we decide to document more of the release process here.
While here I changed the heading syntax to use
#because it allows deeper nesting and I think it's easier to read.Targets
mastersince it's docs only.What has been done to verify that this works as intended?
Read it.
Why is this the best possible solution? Were any other approaches considered?
It provides the info succinctly.
How does this change affect users? Describe intentional changes to behavior and behavior that could have accidentally been affected by code changes. In other words, what are the regression risks?
No user-facing change, this just documents existing process.
Does this change require updates to documentation? If so, please file an issue here and include the link below.
This is the docs update.
Before submitting this PR, please make sure you have:
nextbranch OR only changed documentation/infrastructure (masteris stable and used in production)