# Description of Changes
<!-- Please describe your change, mention any related tickets, and so on
here. -->
- Bumps version to 2.7.0
# API and ABI breaking changes
<!-- If this is an API or ABI breaking change, please apply the
corresponding GitHub label. -->
None
# Expected complexity level and risk
- 1 - this is just a version bump
<!--
How complicated do you think these changes are? Grade on a scale from 1
to 5,
where 1 is a trivial change, and 5 is a deep-reaching and complex
change.
This complexity rating applies not only to the complexity apparent in
the diff,
but also to its interactions with existing and future code.
If you answered more than a 2, explain what is complex about the PR,
and what other components it interacts with in potentially concerning
ways. -->
# Testing
<!-- Describe any testing you've done, and any testing you'd like your
reviewers to do,
so that you're confident that all the changes work as expected! -->
- [x] Version number is correct (`2.7.0`)
- [x] BSL license file has been updated with the new date and version
number
# Description of Changes
* Bump version to 2.6.0
# API and ABI breaking changes
None
# Expected complexity level and risk
* 1 - this is just a version bump
# Testing
- [X] Version number is correct (`2.6.0`)
- [X] BSL license file has been updated with the new date and version
number
# Description of Changes
Bump version to `2.5.0` for new release
# API and ABI breaking changes
N/A
# Expected complexity level and risk
1
# Testing
None
# Description of Changes
The previous PR only bumped the Rust packages since that's what we were
releasing. Since we may release more, we can now bump the rest of the
versions.
(This is harmless if we don't end up releasing the other packages
anyway; I could have just done this in the first place).
# API and ABI breaking changes
None
# Expected complexity level and risk
1
# Testing
CI only
Co-authored-by: Zeke Foppa <bfops@users.noreply.github.com>
# Description of Changes
* Bumps version to 2.4.0
# API and ABI breaking changes
None
# Expected complexity level and risk
* 1 - this is just a version bump
# Testing
- [X] Version number is correct (`2.4.0`)
- [X] BSL license file has been updated with the new date and version
number
---------
Signed-off-by: Ryan <r.ekhoff@clockworklabs.io>
# Description of Changes
- Completes the Blackholio demo with username selection, leader board,
split mechanic, improved visuals...
- Add Godot tests
# API and ABI breaking changes
- Nothing
# Expected complexity level and risk
1. It just updates the Blackholio demo project
# Testing
- [X] Play the updated demo
- [X] Run the tests locally
# Description of Changes
A follow-on to #5133 that fixes another Godot flake that was observed
after #5133 merged. Specifically a C# SDK regen flake where the Godot
package restore path reused `sdks/csharp/packages`, which is also the
Unity-visible package cache.
During `cargo regen csharp dlls`, the Godot flow previously did this:
- cleared `sdks/csharp/packages/godotsharp`
- cleared `sdks/csharp/obj~/godot`
- restored the Godot project back into `sdks/csharp/packages`
- packed the Godot project using that same Unity-visible package area
That meant a Godot-only cleanup could delete package content under the
Unity SDK package cache. If a previous GodotSharp restore was partial or
stale, regen tried to fix it by deleting `packages/godotsharp`, but that
path is visible to Unity and can cause dirty/missing package content
during regen.
With this change, Godot restore state is now isolated under
`sdks/csharp/obj~/godot/packages`, and the regen flow becomes:
- clear only `sdks/csharp/obj~/godot`
- restore the Godot project into `sdks/csharp/obj~/godot/packages`
- pack the Godot project under the same path
Clearing `obj~/godot` now removes both Godot intermediates and
Godot-only NuGet packages, while leaving the normal Unity SDK package
cache under `sdks/csharp/packages` untouched.
# API and ABI breaking changes
N/A
# Expected complexity level and risk
1
# Testing
- [x] `unity-testsuite` passes
# Description of Changes
Bump version numbers to 2.3.0 in preparation for an upcoming release
# API and ABI breaking changes
None
# Expected complexity level and risk
1
# Testing
CI 🤷
---------
Co-authored-by: Zeke Foppa <bfops@users.noreply.github.com>
# Description of Changes
Very small additions to the C# SDK specific for Godot.
I wrote the Godot Blackholio tutorial and updated the Unity one.
I added the image assets necessary for the tutorial.
I added the files for the Godot demo.
# API and ABI breaking changes
No breaking changes.
# Expected complexity level and risk
1. There's really no risk for current systems or projects, it's all new
additions to support nicely(-ish) Godot, new Blackholio demo for Godot
and updates to the tutorials.
# Testing
- [X] Follow the tutorial and verify everything works.
- [X] Build for Windows and verify it works.
- [x] Build for Linux and verify it works.
- [x] Build SDK
- [x] Publish to Nuget
---------
Co-authored-by: rekhoff <r.ekhoff@clockworklabs.io>
Co-authored-by: Zeke Foppa <bfops@users.noreply.github.com>
Ryan