Skip to content

0.1.8: the LadybugDB retraction fix belongs in this release's notes - #124

Merged
Shashankss1205 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/changelog-110-in-0.1.8
Sep 26, 2026
Merged

Shashankss1205 merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/changelog-110-in-0.1.8

Conversation

@Shashankss1205

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

#123 merged after the release commit, so main carries the #110 fix while the ## 0.1.8 section of the changelog says nothing about it.

0.1.8 is not published and not tagged — PyPI is still on 0.1.7 — so the release's contents are not frozen. Folding the entry in is the correct fix and leaves no version gap. Shipping it as 0.1.9 instead would mean publishing twice for one batch of work, and skipping a version on PyPI for no reason.

The entry carries the same weight as the other four in that section: what broke, how it surfaced, which alternatives were rejected and why, and what the migration can and cannot recover.

After this, dist/ needs rebuilding so the artifacts match — the wheel currently in dist/ predates #123.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

#123 merged after the release commit, so `main` carried the fix while the
0.1.8 section said nothing about it. 0.1.8 is not published and not tagged,
so the release's contents are not frozen: folding the entry in is correct and
leaves no version gap, where shipping it as 0.1.9 would have meant publishing
twice for one batch of work.

The entry carries the same weight as the other four — what broke, how it
surfaced, which options were rejected and why, and what the migration can and
cannot recover.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@Shashankss1205
Shashankss1205 merged commit 34c11ec into main Sep 26, 2026
7 checks passed
@Shashankss1205
Shashankss1205 deleted the docs/changelog-110-in-0.1.8 branch September 26, 2026 11:46
Shashankss1205 added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 26, 2026
#127 and #126 merged after the release commit and neither is in the notes.
0.1.8 is still unpublished and untagged, so folding them in is correct for the
same reason #124 did it for #123.

The reclaim gets a full entry: it changes shipped behaviour and adds a public
method, and the entry is explicit that it closes a documented *limitation*
rather than a defect -- which comes to the same thing for whoever hit it. What
it refuses, and why nothing calls it automatically, are the load-bearing parts
and are stated.

The styling gate goes in the tooling paragraph, where it belongs: it changes no
shipped behaviour, it changes what a regression in shipped behaviour would be
caught by.

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Shashankss1205 added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 26, 2026
#115 and #129 merged after the release commit. 0.1.8 is still unpublished and
untagged, so folding them into its notes is right for the same reason #124 and
#128 did it.

The research registry gets a full entry: it is a shipped module and it closes
the gap that the planner's headline capability -- decomposition -- was the one
with no runnable example, while the only registry in the box demonstrated
refusal. Credited to @only-ouc, whose pull request it is.

The drift job's wheel walk goes in the tooling paragraph beside the styling
gate: it changes nothing shipped, it changes what a break in shipped behaviour
would be caught by.

Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
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.

1 participant