feat: Don't overwrite header information anymore Colin-b/keepachangel…#61
Open
cgringmuth wants to merge 1 commit intoColin-b:developfrom
Open
feat: Don't overwrite header information anymore Colin-b/keepachangel…#61cgringmuth wants to merge 1 commit intoColin-b:developfrom
cgringmuth wants to merge 1 commit intoColin-b:developfrom
Conversation
Author
|
Just realized, this might break other people code which rely on the structure. Exposing the internal dictionary means almost always breaking changes if you add/modify something. Too bad |
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Now the module does not overwrite existing Header/Introduction section anymore. If there is no header, it will behave like the old implementation.
It fixes the request from #33, which I also needed.
It is a bit of a workaround because the dictionary just contained releases and header information was not initially thought of. However, I wanted to keep this dictionary, instead of having custom class. So, this changes seemed to me like the best way to go, without changing too much or even introducing new container.