Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

bump crates versions for docs on release v1.1.0 #1222

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 17, 2024
Merged

bump crates versions for docs on release v1.1.0 #1222

merged 3 commits into from
Oct 17, 2024

Conversation

plebhash
Copy link
Collaborator

@plebhash plebhash commented Oct 17, 2024

close #1221

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 17, 2024

🐰 Bencher Report

Branch1222/merge
Testbedsv2

⚠️ WARNING: The following Measures do not have a Threshold. Without a Threshold, no Alerts will ever be generated!

Click here to create a new Threshold
For more information, see the Threshold documentation.
To only post results if a Threshold exists, set the --ci-only-thresholds CLI flag.

Click to view all benchmark results
BenchmarkEstimated Cyclesestimated cyclesInstructionsinstructionsL1 AccessesaccessesL2 AccessesaccessesRAM Accessesaccesses
client_sv2_handle_message_common📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
2,095.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
473.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
735.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
6.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
38.00
client_sv2_handle_message_mining📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
8,200.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
2,137.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
3,160.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
35.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
139.00
client_sv2_mining_message_submit_standard📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
6,289.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
1,750.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
2,549.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
20.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
104.00
client_sv2_mining_message_submit_standard_serialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
14,686.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
4,694.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
6,756.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
46.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
220.00
client_sv2_mining_message_submit_standard_serialize_deserialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
27,490.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
10,585.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
15,405.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
79.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
334.00
client_sv2_open_channel📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
4,383.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
1,461.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
2,158.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
11.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
62.00
client_sv2_open_channel_serialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
14,002.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
5,064.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
7,322.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
41.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
185.00
client_sv2_open_channel_serialize_deserialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
22,643.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
8,027.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
11,673.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
80.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
302.00
client_sv2_setup_connection📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
4,681.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
1,502.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
2,276.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
12.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
67.00
client_sv2_setup_connection_serialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
16,118.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
5,963.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
8,663.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
42.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
207.00
client_sv2_setup_connection_serialize_deserialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
35,484.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
14,855.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
21,824.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
93.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
377.00
🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 17, 2024

🐰 Bencher Report

Branch1222/merge
Testbedsv1

⚠️ WARNING: The following Measures do not have a Threshold. Without a Threshold, no Alerts will ever be generated!

Click here to create a new Threshold
For more information, see the Threshold documentation.
To only post results if a Threshold exists, set the --ci-only-thresholds CLI flag.

Click to view all benchmark results
BenchmarkEstimated Cyclesestimated cyclesInstructionsinstructionsL1 AccessesaccessesL2 AccessesaccessesRAM Accessesaccesses
get_authorize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
8,545.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
3,772.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
5,295.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
6.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
92.00
get_submit📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
95,468.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
59,522.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
85,508.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
46.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
278.00
get_subscribe📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
8,060.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
2,848.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
3,985.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
10.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
115.00
serialize_authorize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
12,328.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
5,343.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
7,458.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
8.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
138.00
serialize_deserialize_authorize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
24,863.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
9,920.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
14,018.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
34.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
305.00
serialize_deserialize_handle_authorize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
30,447.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
12,097.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
17,137.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
58.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
372.00
serialize_deserialize_handle_submit📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
126,517.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
73,363.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
105,192.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
114.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
593.00
serialize_deserialize_handle_subscribe📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
28,011.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
9,666.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
13,671.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
68.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
400.00
serialize_deserialize_submit📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
115,411.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
68,223.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
97,936.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
65.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
490.00
serialize_deserialize_subscribe📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
23,389.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
8,225.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
11,594.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
35.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
332.00
serialize_submit📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
99,861.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
61,566.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
88,351.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
48.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
322.00
serialize_subscribe📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
11,397.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
4,195.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
5,842.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
12.00📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
157.00
🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 17, 2024

🐰 Bencher Report

Branch1222/merge
Testbedsv1

⚠️ WARNING: The following Measure does not have a Threshold. Without a Threshold, no Alerts will ever be generated!

Click here to create a new Threshold
For more information, see the Threshold documentation.
To only post results if a Threshold exists, set the --ci-only-thresholds CLI flag.

Click to view all benchmark results
BenchmarkLatencynanoseconds (ns)
client-submit-serialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
7,101.00
client-submit-serialize-deserialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
8,052.80
client-submit-serialize-deserialize-handle/client-submit-serialize-deserialize-handle📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
8,698.10
client-sv1-authorize-serialize-deserialize-handle/client-sv1-authorize-serialize-deserialize-handle📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
913.76
client-sv1-authorize-serialize-deserialize/client-sv1-authorize-serialize-deserialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
719.01
client-sv1-authorize-serialize/client-sv1-authorize-serialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
253.43
client-sv1-get-authorize/client-sv1-get-authorize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
158.54
client-sv1-get-submit📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
6,898.80
client-sv1-get-subscribe/client-sv1-get-subscribe📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
292.51
client-sv1-subscribe-serialize-deserialize-handle/client-sv1-subscribe-serialize-deserialize-handle📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
764.69
client-sv1-subscribe-serialize-deserialize/client-sv1-subscribe-serialize-deserialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
618.96
client-sv1-subscribe-serialize/client-sv1-subscribe-serialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
202.84
🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 17, 2024

🐰 Bencher Report

Branch1222/merge
Testbedsv2

⚠️ WARNING: The following Measure does not have a Threshold. Without a Threshold, no Alerts will ever be generated!

Click here to create a new Threshold
For more information, see the Threshold documentation.
To only post results if a Threshold exists, set the --ci-only-thresholds CLI flag.

Click to view all benchmark results
BenchmarkLatencynanoseconds (ns)
client_sv2_handle_message_common📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
45.37
client_sv2_handle_message_mining📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
73.08
client_sv2_mining_message_submit_standard📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
14.65
client_sv2_mining_message_submit_standard_serialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
272.89
client_sv2_mining_message_submit_standard_serialize_deserialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
583.90
client_sv2_open_channel📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
148.58
client_sv2_open_channel_serialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
291.38
client_sv2_open_channel_serialize_deserialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
369.06
client_sv2_setup_connection📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
168.32
client_sv2_setup_connection_serialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
485.66
client_sv2_setup_connection_serialize_deserialize📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
991.74
🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 17, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 19.36%. Comparing base (384df6c) to head (5bf3939).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1222   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   19.36%   19.36%           
=======================================
  Files         164      164           
  Lines       10811    10811           
=======================================
  Hits         2094     2094           
  Misses       8717     8717           
Flag Coverage Δ
binary_codec_sv2-coverage 0.00% <ø> (ø)
binary_serde_sv2-coverage 3.65% <ø> (ø)
binary_sv2-coverage 5.46% <ø> (ø)
bip32_derivation-coverage 0.00% <ø> (ø)
buffer_sv2-coverage 25.02% <ø> (ø)
codec_sv2-coverage 0.01% <ø> (ø)
common_messages_sv2-coverage 0.13% <ø> (ø)
const_sv2-coverage 0.00% <ø> (ø)
error_handling-coverage 0.00% <ø> (ø)
framing_sv2-coverage 0.29% <ø> (ø)
jd_client-coverage 0.00% <ø> (ø)
jd_server-coverage 8.13% <ø> (ø)
job_declaration_sv2-coverage 0.00% <ø> (ø)
key-utils-coverage 2.39% <ø> (ø)
mining-coverage 2.51% <ø> (ø)
mining_device-coverage 0.00% <ø> (ø)
mining_proxy_sv2-coverage 0.70% <ø> (ø)
noise_sv2-coverage 4.35% <ø> (ø)
pool_sv2-coverage 1.38% <ø> (ø)
protocols 24.72% <ø> (ø)
roles 6.63% <ø> (ø)
roles_logic_sv2-coverage 8.06% <ø> (ø)
sv1-mining-device-coverage 0.00% <ø> (ø)
sv2_ffi-coverage 0.00% <ø> (ø)
template_distribution_sv2-coverage 0.00% <ø> (ø)
translator_sv2-coverage 9.61% <ø> (ø)
utils 25.13% <ø> (ø)
v1-coverage 2.47% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@Shourya742
Copy link
Contributor

Semantic Versioning: Major:Minor:Patch.
Can't we increase the patch number instead of the minor number?

@plebhash
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Semantic Versioning: Major:Minor:Patch. Can't we increase the patch number instead of the minor number?

see https://semver.org/

Semantic Versioning 2.0.0
Summary
Given a version number MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, increment the:

MAJOR version when you make incompatible API changes
MINOR version when you add functionality in a backward compatible manner
PATCH version when you make backward compatible bug fixes
Additional labels for pre-release and build metadata are available as extensions to the MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH format.

we're not really fixing any bugs, and this is adding functionality in a backward compatible manner

@Shourya742
Copy link
Contributor

Semantic Versioning: Major:Minor:Patch. Can't we increase the patch number instead of the minor number?

see https://semver.org/

Semantic Versioning 2.0.0
Summary
Given a version number MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, increment the:
MAJOR version when you make incompatible API changes
MINOR version when you add functionality in a backward compatible manner
PATCH version when you make backward compatible bug fixes
Additional labels for pre-release and build metadata are available as extensions to the MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH format.

we're not really fixing any bugs, and this is adding functionality in a backward compatible manner

But we're not making any changes to the code or adding any new api.

@Fi3
Copy link
Collaborator

Fi3 commented Oct 17, 2024

which functionality are you adding? @plebhash

@Fi3
Copy link
Collaborator

Fi3 commented Oct 17, 2024

Semantic Versioning: Major:Minor:Patch. Can't we increase the patch number instead of the minor number?

see https://semver.org/

Semantic Versioning 2.0.0
Summary
Given a version number MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, increment the:
MAJOR version when you make incompatible API changes
MINOR version when you add functionality in a backward compatible manner
PATCH version when you make backward compatible bug fixes
Additional labels for pre-release and build metadata are available as extensions to the MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH format.

we're not really fixing any bugs, and this is adding functionality in a backward compatible manner

But we're not making any changes to the code or adding any new api.

if that is the case we should increase pathc version

@plebhash
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Semantic Versioning: Major:Minor:Patch. Can't we increase the patch number instead of the minor number?

see https://semver.org/

Semantic Versioning 2.0.0
Summary
Given a version number MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH, increment the:
MAJOR version when you make incompatible API changes
MINOR version when you add functionality in a backward compatible manner
PATCH version when you make backward compatible bug fixes
Additional labels for pre-release and build metadata are available as extensions to the MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH format.

we're not really fixing any bugs, and this is adding functionality in a backward compatible manner

But we're not making any changes to the code or adding any new api.

if that is the case we should increase pathc version

when we first wrote Rust Docs for framing_sv2 via #848 , we then bumped MINOR via #913

so I followed the same criteria here.

I'm fine on using this new criteria (bump PATCH instead of MINOR) for the crates we document on the next iteration.

But I don't think it would be a good idea to change this PR since those crates have now been published and that is irreversible.

Copy link
Collaborator

@GitGab19 GitGab19 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ACK

@plebhash plebhash merged commit 7e6b2b2 into main Oct 17, 2024
39 checks passed
@plebhash plebhash deleted the v1.1.0 branch October 17, 2024 15:19
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.

need to bump crates versions for docs on release v1.1.0
4 participants