This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2022-02-01
Channels
- # announcements (3)
- # aws (1)
- # babashka (56)
- # beginners (42)
- # calva (9)
- # cider (6)
- # circleci (5)
- # clj-kondo (17)
- # cljs-experience (1)
- # cljsjs (2)
- # clojure (106)
- # clojure-australia (1)
- # clojure-europe (36)
- # clojure-germany (5)
- # clojure-italy (13)
- # clojure-nl (14)
- # clojure-spec (19)
- # clojure-uk (27)
- # clojurescript (27)
- # cursive (20)
- # datomic (24)
- # events (2)
- # fulcro (11)
- # graalvm (1)
- # jobs (6)
- # lsp (6)
- # malli (5)
- # meander (36)
- # membrane (17)
- # nbb (4)
- # nextjournal (86)
- # off-topic (18)
- # pathom (3)
- # polylith (5)
- # portal (14)
- # rdf (5)
- # re-frame (5)
- # releases (6)
- # remote-jobs (3)
- # reveal (2)
- # ring (6)
- # shadow-cljs (171)
- # tools-deps (61)
- # vim (10)
- # xtdb (6)
we are on a relatively old version of re-frame currently (0.8.3) and are wondering if there were breaking changes between there and 1.3.0-rc2. we are also using: re-frame-utils 0.1.0 re-frame-10x 0.4.2 async-flow-fx 0.1.0 & re-posh 0.3.3 safe to upgrade or better stick with the conservative approach ?
From memory (it's been a while, don't consider it word of god) • it'll also include a breaking reagent upgrade. ◦ some functions moving from reagent.core to reagent.ratom • re-frame-10x had issues, probably okay by now. Moved to re-frisk • Can't speak to utils/flow-fx/re-posh Otherwise there wasn't much issue with upgrading for us. Any issues were compile errors, you should spot them fast
@U0E98NQG2 the Changes.md file is well maintained and calls out anything breaking (which is generally kept to a minimum).
But that's for re-frame itself. I can't comment on the interaction with re-posh.
@U051MTYAB ok thanks! you guys almost convinced me to take the plunge.