Prepare release of 0.35

[okurz]

No description provided.

[kalikiana]

    not ok 2 - sigchld_handler.pl exit with 0
    
    #   Failed test 'sigchld_handler.pl exit with 0'
    #   at t/01_run.t line 649.
    #          got: '255'
    #     expected: '0'
    not ok 3 - SIG_CHLD handler was executed
    
    #   Failed test 'SIG_CHLD handler was executed'
    #   at t/01_run.t line 651.
    #                   ''
    #     doesn't match '(?^:SIG_CHLD)'
    1..3
    # Looks like you failed 2 tests of 3.
not ok 12 - SIG_CHLD handler in spawned process

#   Failed test 'SIG_CHLD handler in spawned process'
#   at t/01_run.t line 652.

Same as on master. Just for reference since I was checking if there was any new errors.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 89.25%. Comparing base (662e615) to head (d6396b4).
Report is 4 commits behind head on master.

❌ Your changes status has failed because you have indirect coverage changes. Learn more about Unexpected Coverage Changes and reasons for indirect coverage changes.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #67      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   89.36%   89.25%   -0.12%     
==========================================
  Files          27       27              
  Lines         903      903              
  Branches      207      207              
==========================================
- Hits          807      806       -1     
  Misses         21       21              
- Partials       75       76       +1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[perlpunk]

Can we use a modern version here?

Suggested change

	0.35 2025-03-17 12:20:20Z
	v0.350.0 2025-03-17 12:20:20Z

https://github.com/perlpunk/perl5-module-meta links to
https://blogs.perl.org/users/grinnz/2018/04/a-guide-to-versions-in-perl.html

[okurz]

I thought you meant 0.35.0 instead of 0.350? If I understand https://semver.org/#is-v123-a-semantic-version and https://github.com/perlpunk/perl5-module-meta correctly then our new version should be "0.35.0" without the "v" prefix but in the Changes file maybe we should use v? Also based on https://build.opensuse.org/projects/devel:languages:perl/packages/perl-Perl-Tidy/files/perl-Perl-Tidy.spec?expand=1 or other recent package updates in https://build.opensuse.org/project/show/devel:languages:perl and https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Amojolicious%2Fmojo%209.40&type=code the git tag should be "v0.35.0" but the string in Changes and in source should be w/o the "v" prefix. Right?

Also I am considering 1.0.0 to make the switch of version format more apparent

[perlpunk]

no, we should use v0.350.0.
v0.35.0 would be lower than 0.35, beause 0.35 is the same as 0.350 and the same as v0.350.0

The git tag is completely irrelevant to CPAN.

I'm not sure what you mean by linking to https://build.opensuse.org/projects/devel:languages:perl/packages/perl-Perl-Tidy/files/perl-Perl-Tidy.spec?expand=1
That's what cpanspec makes of the version from CPAN. It removes the v from the beginning for rpm.

So: please use the v everywhere and two dots.

[perlpunk]

https://metacpan.org/dist/YAML-PP
Tarball name: YAML-PP-v0.39.0.tar.gz

https://metacpan.org/release/TINITA/YAML-PP-v0.39.0/source/META.json#L214

"version" : "v0.39.0",

https://metacpan.org/release/TINITA/YAML-PP-v0.39.0/source/META.yml

version: v0.39.0

https://metacpan.org/release/TINITA/YAML-PP-v0.39.0/source/Changes#L3

v0.39.0 2025-02-10 00:01:45+01:00

https://metacpan.org/dist/YAML-PP/source/lib/YAML/PP.pm#L6

our $VERSION = 'v0.39.0'; # VERSION

[perlpunk]

and https://blogs.perl.org/users/grinnz/2018/04/a-guide-to-versions-in-perl.html

For this reason it's best to include both a leading "v" and at least two decimal separators for clarity when using tuple versions.

[perlpunk]

And linking to https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Amojolicious%2Fmojo%209.40&type=code is irrelevant, because Mojolicious still uses the decimal version format.

[okurz]

as it says "when using tuple versions" but I wouldn't use tuple versions but decimal version format. Again, I would avoid the ambiguity about 0.35X by using 1.0.0

[okurz]

-> #74

[perlpunk]

as it says "when using tuple versions" but I wouldn't use tuple versions but decimal version format. Again, I would avoid the ambiguity about 0.35X by using 1.0.0

1.0.0 is a tupled version. and my suggestion was to use the tupled version format from now on.

[okurz]

was replaced by #74