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

fix(deps): update dependency @unhead/vue to ^1.8.20 #610

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 16, 2024

Conversation

renovate[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@renovate renovate bot commented Mar 16, 2024

Mend Renovate

This PR contains the following updates:

Package Change Age Adoption Passing Confidence
@unhead/vue (source) ^1.8.18 -> ^1.8.20 age adoption passing confidence

Release Notes

unjs/unhead (@​unhead/vue)

v1.8.20

Compare Source

   🏎 Performance
    View changes on GitHub

v1.8.19

Compare Source

   🐞 Bug Fixes
    View changes on GitHub

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - "every weekend" in timezone Asia/Shanghai, Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined).

🚦 Automerge: Enabled.

Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.


  • If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

This PR has been generated by Mend Renovate. View repository job log here.

@renovate renovate bot added the dependencies Pull requests that update a dependency file label Mar 16, 2024

This PR has 44 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!


Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +22 -22
Percentile : 17.6%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.json : +1 -1
.yaml : +21 -21

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.


Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

Copy link

socket-security bot commented Mar 16, 2024

New and removed dependencies detected. Learn more about Socket for GitHub ↗︎

Package New capabilities Transitives Size Publisher

🚮 Removed packages: npm/@unhead/vue@1.8.18

View full report↗︎

@renovate renovate bot changed the title fix(deps): update dependency @unhead/vue to ^1.8.19 fix(deps): update dependency @unhead/vue to ^1.8.20 Mar 16, 2024

This PR has 44 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!


Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +22 -22
Percentile : 17.6%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.json : +1 -1
.yaml : +21 -21

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.


Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@sabertazimi sabertazimi merged commit 9406d0d into main Mar 16, 2024
8 checks passed
@sabertazimi sabertazimi deleted the renovate/dependencies branch March 16, 2024 07:36
github-actions bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 16, 2024
Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com> 9406d0d
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
dependencies Pull requests that update a dependency file Extra Small
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant