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

Remove Agricultural Bulletin functionality #92

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

bozaah
Copy link
Collaborator

@bozaah bozaah commented Feb 20, 2025

Breaking changes:

  • Removed ('defunct') functions get_ag_bulletin() and parse_ag_bulletin() because BOM's agricultural bulletin service is no longer available since early February 2025.
  • Updated tests to reflect the removal of these functions.
  • Proposed version updated to v1.1.0

Bug fixes:

  • Fixed issues with get_dpird_summaries(), including updating tests to dynamically use the previous year instead of fixed dates.
  • Resolved test bugs in find_stations_in() where the function did not return the correct number of stations due to recent changes in the weather station infrastructure.

Additional fixes and improvements:

  • Re-documented package to reflect changes
  • Updated test cassete fixtures
  • Updated BOM-related vignette
  • Updated WORDLIST for spelling checks

@bozaah bozaah self-assigned this Feb 20, 2025
@bozaah
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bozaah commented Feb 20, 2025

All tests and check are passing locally.

@bozaah
Copy link
Collaborator Author

bozaah commented Feb 20, 2025

@adamhsparks, is it reasonable to bump the current version to v1.1.0? Reading about versioning semantics, it is suggested that we should bump it to v2.0.0 due to the breaking changes. However, these changes are only minor functionality, so I have proposed v1.1.0.

After that, I will create a new release tag and proceed with the release.

@adamhsparks
Copy link
Member

Removing functionality totally breaks backwards compatibility. Yes, it seems funny to jump to 2.0.0 so suddenly after the initial release, but in reality that's what you should do here. A minor version, like you've proposed, would be acceptable if you only added new functionality, not removed which could break workflows so a major release is called for.

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