Plan next release

[SethTisue]

What should the version number be? 1.0.3? 1.1.0?

[armanbilge]

I understand the publishing org changed in #205?

To me it seems like that will require a package name change and a breaking version bump to 2.0.0 to avoid classpath problems.

[SethTisue]

@eed3si9n have other sbt plugins that have changed publishing orgs also changed package names...?

[armanbilge]

sbt-pgp didn't: https://github.com/sbt/sbt-pgp/releases/tag/v2.1.2

IDK. sbt-git seems like a foundational plugin that might power versioning plugins, gh-pages publishing plugins, what have you. Seems ripe for triangle diamond :) dependencies.

[eed3si9n]

It's a mix. I imagine that some projects are more comfortable using original authors domain as package names because we know them personally while others might opt for more neutral package name for consistency etc? Here are non-exhaustive list:

• sbt-pgp. unchanged com.jsuereth.sbtpgp - https://github.com/sbt/sbt-pgp/blob/develop/sbt-pgp/src/main/scala/com/jsuereth/sbtpgp/SbtPgp.scala
• junit-interface. unchanged com.novocode.junit - https://github.com/sbt/junit-interface/blob/develop/src/main/java/com/novocode/junit/JUnitFramework.java
• sbt-avro. changed com.github.sbt.avro - https://github.com/sbt/sbt-avro/blob/master/src/main/scala/com/github/sbt/avro/SbtAvro.scala
• sbt-ci-release. unchanged com.geirsson - https://github.com/sbt/sbt-ci-release/blob/main/plugin/src/main/scala/com/geirsson/CiReleasePlugin.scala
• sbt-jacoco. changed com.github.sbt.jacoco - https://github.com/sbt/sbt-jacoco/blob/main/src/main/scala/com/github/sbt/jacoco/JacocoPlugin.scala
• sbt-jni. changed com.github.sbt.jni - https://github.com/sbt/sbt-jni/blob/main/plugin/src/main/scala/com/github/sbt/jni/plugins/JniNative.scala

[raboof]

I understand the publishing org changed in #205?

To me it seems like that will require a package name change (...) to avoid classpath problems.

That's a great point, let's discuss that separately in #216

and a breaking version bump to 2.0.0

Since the groupId changed I don't think we strictly need to, but I agree it might be nice.

[armanbilge]

Re the version bump: since Scala Steward knows about the group id change, downstreams will receive PRs updating them per usual. So a version bump is important to communicate this breaking change IMO. Edit/clarification: breaking change, if we change the package.

[armanbilge]

Sorry to be annoying, but any ideas how we can get unblocked? #218 is one way forward. Another way forward is to not care about eviction problems and plunge ahead of course :) all other ideas proposed so far require reviving the old group id and publication credentials.

[SethTisue]

#218 seems fine to me. Anyone strongly object to taking that path?

[raboof]

Okay, so our options are:

• merge Change package to com.github.sbt.git #218 and release 2.0.0, with the consequence that you cannot have 1.x and 2.x versions of sbt-git on the plugin classpath side-by-side
• merge Change package to com.github.sbt.git #218, revert Switch to com.github.sbt #205 and release 2.0.0, with the downside that we'd still want Switch to com.github.sbt #205 in the future
• do not merge Change package to com.github.sbt.git #218, introduce a 'transitional' 1.x, release 2.0.0, supporting both 1.x and 2.x side-by-side

I'm also OK with the first option (and its consequence). If no-one objects let's go for that.

[armanbilge]

Cool, seems the way forward is #218 and release 2.0.0. Thanks all!

[SethTisue]

tagged https://github.com/sbt/sbt-git/releases/tag/v2.0.0

publish job https://github.com/sbt/sbt-git/actions/runs/2059270141

artifacts are on their way to Maven Central

[armanbilge]

Thank you!!!

[SethTisue]

Thank you Eugene, Arnout, Arman