-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 292
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
Release 5.0.0
changes
#3652
Open
NachoSoto
wants to merge
56
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
5.0-dev
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Release 5.0.0
changes
#3652
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
This was referenced Feb 7, 2024
Closed
NachoSoto
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2024
This will allow the implementation of color overrides by tier for the up-coming multi-tier paywall. This is a backwards incompatible change, so we could include it in #3652.
NachoSoto
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2024
This will allow the implementation of color overrides by tier for the up-coming multi-tier paywall. This is a backwards incompatible change, so we could include it in #3652.
NachoSoto
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2024
This will allow the implementation of color overrides by tier for the up-coming multi-tier paywall. This is a backwards incompatible change, so we could include it in #3652.
NachoSoto
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2024
This will allow the implementation of color overrides by tier for the up-coming multi-tier paywall. This is a backwards incompatible change, so we could include it in #3652.
NachoSoto
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2024
This will allow the implementation of color overrides by tier for the up-coming multi-tier paywall. This is a backwards incompatible change, so we could include it in #3652.
NachoSoto
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2024
This will allow the implementation of color overrides by tier for the up-coming multi-tier paywall. This is a backwards incompatible change, so we could include it in #3652.
NachoSoto
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2024
This will allow the implementation of color overrides by tier for the up-coming multi-tier paywall. This is a backwards incompatible change, so we could include it in #3652.
NachoSoto
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 9, 2024
This will allow the implementation of color overrides by tier for the up-coming multi-tier paywall. This is a backwards incompatible change, so we could include it in #3652.
NachoSoto
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 12, 2024
This will allow the implementation of color overrides by tier for the up-coming multi-tier paywall. This is a backwards incompatible change, so we could include it in #3652.
NachoSoto
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 12, 2024
This will allow the implementation of color overrides by tier for the up-coming multi-tier paywall. This is a backwards incompatible change, so we could include it in #3652.
NachoSoto
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 12, 2024
This will allow the implementation of color overrides by tier for the up-coming multi-tier paywall. This is a backwards incompatible change, so we could include it in #3652.
NachoSoto
force-pushed
the
5.0-dev
branch
3 times, most recently
from
February 14, 2024 19:10
878e414
to
14560db
Compare
MarkVillacampa
force-pushed
the
5.0-dev
branch
from
February 21, 2024 22:26
9478539
to
8dce7af
Compare
MarkVillacampa
force-pushed
the
5.0-dev
branch
2 times, most recently
from
March 6, 2024 17:23
d547bb2
to
9571006
Compare
Generated by 🚫 Danger |
…n of StoreKit to use (#3487) This PR introduces a new configuration option to select the StoreKit version to use. It supersedes the deprecated `.with(usesStoreKit2IfAvailable: true)` and the internal `usesStoreKit2JWS` configuration options. Uses JWS tokens instead of SK1 receipts when in StoreKit 2 mode where applicable. Example usage: ```swift Purchases.configure( with: .builder(withAPIKey: apiKey) .with(storeKitVersion: .storeKit2) .build() ```
We can use any transaction token available, not only auto-renewable ones
…ase (#3711) <!-- Thank you for contributing to Purchases! Before pressing the "Create Pull Request" button, please provide the following: --> ### Checklist - [ ] If applicable, unit tests - [ ] If applicable, create follow-up issues for `purchases-android` and hybrids ### Motivation <!-- Why is this change required? What problem does it solve? --> <!-- Please link to issues following this format: Resolves #999999 --> ### Description <!-- Describe your changes in detail --> <!-- Please describe in detail how you tested your changes -->
### Motivation `onChangeOf` was accidentally made public in #3517 ### Description - Change scope of `onChangeOf` from `public` to `internal` - Added breaking change in v5 migration doc
Co-authored-by: James Borthwick <109382862+jamesrb1@users.noreply.github.com>
### Motivation Releasing was failing with `rb-readline` and `cocoapods` in [this job](https://app.circleci.com/pipelines/github/RevenueCat/purchases-ios/19139/workflows/2b6ac90c-3f0f-438e-8964-365f47c2d31b/jobs/207470) ### Description Remove `rb-readline` hack and drop to Ruby 3.2 for CircleCI
This is "ready for review" but it requires #3833 to be merged into it first to fully pass ### Motivation Prevent the need to fully rerun all backend tests job when only a few flaky tests fail ### Description 1. Runs backend integration tests - Parses junit.xml for failed tests - Writes them to a file 2. Runs new step in CircleCI - Looks at file for tests to re-run and only runs those tests - Merges new junit.xml into original junit.xml The retry happens 4 times right now and will fail (raise an error) if there are any left over tests that never ended up passing --------- Co-authored-by: Will Taylor <wtaylor151@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Andy Boedo <andresboedo@gmail.com>
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.
TODO: