Skip to content

Bump payjoin-cli version to 1.0.0 - #1943

Open
DanGould wants to merge 2 commits into
bump-payjoin-1-2-0from
cli-1-0-0-recut
Open

DanGould wants to merge 2 commits into
bump-payjoin-1-2-0from
cli-1-0-0-recut

Conversation

@DanGould

@DanGould DanGould commented Oct 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

payjoin-cli 1.0.0, re-cut from the 1.2.0 bump instead of the five-PR stack. Two commits.

The first makes payjoin-cli's and payjoin-mailroom's dev-dependency on payjoin-test-utils path-only. Cargo drops a path-only dev-dependency from the published manifest, so test-utils no longer has to be on crates.io before either crate can be released, and the dev-dependency cycle between test-utils and mailroom stops mattering for publishing. Tests inside the workspace are unchanged. Checked by packaging mailroom from master with the same edit: the packaged manifest keeps rcgen and reqwest and has no mention of test-utils. Both lock files verified consistent with cargo metadata --locked.

The second is Ben's bump commit from #1936, cherry-picked with his authorship. check-invariants passes for payjoin-cli 1.0.0. The publish dry run cannot run until payjoin 1.2.0 is on crates.io, for the same reason check-bump skips it.

Replaces #1934 and #1936. Based on #1931; GitHub retargets this to master when that merges.

Reviewer: @benalleng

Prepared with Claude Code from Ben's commit; I reviewed the diff and the gate output.

DanGould and others added 2 commits October 2, 2026 16:09
payjoin-cli and payjoin-mailroom used payjoin-test-utils only in
tests, but named it by version, so cargo kept the dependency in the
published manifest and the crate had to be on crates.io before either
of them could be released. payjoin-test-utils depends on
payjoin-mailroom, so the two could not be published in any order
without a dangling dev-dependency.

A dev-dependency with a path and no version is dropped from the
published manifest. Test builds inside the workspace are unchanged.
payjoin-test-utils no longer needs a crates.io release ahead of its
dependents.
@DanGould
DanGould requested a review from benalleng October 2, 2026 09:58
@coveralls

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Coverage Report for CI Build 36992736431

Coverage remained the same at 87.289%

Details

  • Coverage remained the same as the base build.
  • Patch coverage: No coverable lines changed in this PR.
  • No coverage regressions found.

Uncovered Changes

No uncovered changes found.

Coverage Regressions

No coverage regressions found.


Coverage Stats

Coverage Status
Relevant Lines: 17804
Covered Lines: 15541
Line Coverage: 87.29%
Coverage Strength: 320.38 hits per line

💛 - Coveralls

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
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.

3 participants