Partial reversal of PR #141 #151
Merged
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
Rebase fork
Rebase fork
The GU10 profile was that of a wrongly paired lamp. We shouldn't test that.
1 similar comment
As discussed with @lwis
Lakitna
commented
Jan 31, 2018
| @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ | |||
| with open(path.join(here, 'README.md'), encoding='utf-8') as f: | |||
| long_description = f.read() | |||
|
|
|||
| VERSION = "5.3.0" | |||
| VERSION = "5.3.1" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm assuming we want to bump the version like this.
Forgot to save after removing a blank line...
|
Should be good to merge? |
|
Sorry, hit wrong button 🤦♂️ |
|
I know that feeling.. I believe it is. |
1 similar comment
|
I know that feeling.. I believe it is. |
ggravlingen
changed the title
|
Thank you @Lakitna! |
|
Pushed to pypi |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
PR #141 proved to be based on incorrect assumptions so we're rolling it back.
Closes #150