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

prepare 1.52.0 #3560

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 23, 2025
Merged

prepare 1.52.0 #3560

merged 1 commit into from
Jan 23, 2025

Conversation

adbenitez
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@adbenitez adbenitez requested review from r10s and Hocuri January 23, 2025 19:04
@adbenitez adbenitez self-assigned this Jan 23, 2025
Copy link

To test the changes in this pull request, install this apk:
📦 app-preview.apk

@adbenitez adbenitez enabled auto-merge January 23, 2025 19:56
## v1.52.0
2025-01

* new group consistency algorithm
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not sure if this is too technical, most users won't understand what it means. Maybe it's possible to find sth everyone understands. In the general direction of "Avoid situations where some members of a group think that Alice is part of the group and others don't" but this is too long and also everyone will wonder "who is Alice??" - I can't think of a really good phrasing myself.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

"Avoid situations where some members of a group think that someone is part of the group and others don't" or "Avoid situations where the members of a group have differing infos on who is part of the group" could work

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

otoh, "algorithm" has become a more well known word in main-stream media, ex "twitter/facebook filter algorithm" etc. and "group consistency" is clear and anything having a "new" label should be good/better right??? 🤣

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

some people might have never experienced these problems so mentioning it might work more as a negative point than positive "so this was actually that broken?"

@adbenitez adbenitez merged commit 6e0759f into main Jan 23, 2025
2 checks passed
@adbenitez adbenitez deleted the prep-1.52.0 branch January 23, 2025 22:37
@Hocuri
Copy link
Collaborator

Hocuri commented Jan 24, 2025

@adbenitez probably we shouldn't use auto-merge on PRs that don't have a review yet 😂

@adbenitez
Copy link
Member Author

adbenitez commented Jan 24, 2025

@adbenitez probably we shouldn't use auto-merge on PRs that don't have a review yet 😂

oops!! yeah, in theory if one has something one wants to be changed before merged, the "request changes" or just comment should be used instead of approving, but it is easy to overlook, I honestly was not expecting any changes needed hence why I enabled auto-merge once someone just approved the PR

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.

2 participants