Skip to content

Conversation

@mnencia
Copy link
Member

@mnencia mnencia commented Jan 9, 2026

Pin crd-ref-docs to v0.2.0 (latest stable release) instead of using the master branch. This prevents issues from upstream changes and provides better control over when to adopt new versions.

Configure Renovate to automatically track and update the version, allowing us to review and test changes before merging.

Closes #722

@mnencia mnencia requested a review from a team as a code owner January 9, 2026 18:02
@dosubot dosubot bot added size:XS This PR changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. documentation Improvements or additions to documentation labels Jan 9, 2026
@dosubot dosubot bot added the lgtm This PR has been approved by a maintainer label Jan 9, 2026
@mnencia mnencia force-pushed the dev/722-version-pin branch from 4372b21 to 5661558 Compare January 10, 2026 15:04
@mnencia mnencia changed the title fix(docs): pin crd-ref-docs version to avoid upstream changes ci(docs): pin crd-ref-docs version to avoid upstream changes Jan 10, 2026
Pin crd-ref-docs to v0.2.0 (latest stable release) instead of using
the master branch. This prevents issues from upstream changes and
provides better control over when to adopt new versions.

Configure Renovate to automatically track and update the version,
allowing us to review and test changes before merging.

Closes #722

Signed-off-by: Marco Nenciarini <marco.nenciarini@enterprisedb.com>
@mnencia mnencia force-pushed the dev/722-version-pin branch from 5661558 to 229ba05 Compare January 12, 2026 09:24
@mnencia mnencia merged commit 4f5b407 into main Jan 12, 2026
6 of 8 checks passed
@mnencia mnencia deleted the dev/722-version-pin branch January 12, 2026 13:19
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

documentation Improvements or additions to documentation lgtm This PR has been approved by a maintainer size:XS This PR changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

docs: confusing 'Optional: {}' markers appear in API documentation validation column

3 participants