-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.1k
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
[RNmobile] Fix change log #55786
[RNmobile] Fix change log #55786
Conversation
|
||
## 1.107.0 | ||
- [*] Social Icons: Fix visibility of inactive icons when used with block based themes in dark mode [#55398] | ||
- [*] Synced Patterns: Fix visibility of heading section when used with block based themes in dark mode [#55399] | ||
- [*] Classic block: Add option to convert to blocks [#55461] | ||
- [*] Fix error when pasting deeply nested structure content [#55613] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's interesting, the PR where the change was introduced added the entry to the Unreleased
section (reference).
My only guess was the force push on that branch confused the git history but not enough to cause a conflict 🤷
Yep, I understand that GitHub should have warned about the conflict but it didn't. Thanks @jhnstn for fixing it 🙇 !
|
||
## 1.107.0 | ||
- [*] Social Icons: Fix visibility of inactive icons when used with block based themes in dark mode [#55398] | ||
- [*] Synced Patterns: Fix visibility of heading section when used with block based themes in dark mode [#55399] | ||
- [*] Classic block: Add option to convert to blocks [#55461] | ||
- [*] Fix error when pasting deeply nested structure content [#55613] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's interesting, the PR where the change was introduced added the entry to the Unreleased
section (reference).
My only guess was the force push on that branch confused the git history but not enough to cause a conflict 🤷
Yep, I understand that GitHub should have warned about the conflict but it didn't. Thanks @jhnstn for fixing it 🙇 !
What?
Place a change note in the unreleased section.
Why?
Perhaps a force push mixed up the branch history?
Testing Instructions
N/A
Testing Instructions for Keyboard
Screenshots or screencast