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

Update hashValues to Object.hash(...) #99

Closed
stan-at-work opened this issue Aug 22, 2024 · 10 comments
Closed

Update hashValues to Object.hash(...) #99

stan-at-work opened this issue Aug 22, 2024 · 10 comments

Comments

@stan-at-work
Copy link

In the next flutter version the function hashValues will be removed and your package won't work anymore.

Please update hashValues to Object.hash(...) in the override of your hashCode at SliverStickyHeaderState

ref: https://api.flutter.dev/flutter/dart-ui/hashValues.html

image

image

@esentis
Copy link

esentis commented Dec 12, 2024

When will this be released ??

@stan-at-work
Copy link
Author

When will this be released ??

Flutter 3.27 just released so this packages is not officialy fucked.

This needs to be fixed ASAP

@stan-at-work stan-at-work changed the title Update hashValues to Object.hash(...) (deprecated) Update hashValues to Object.hash(...) Dec 12, 2024
@stan-at-work
Copy link
Author

stan-at-work commented Dec 12, 2024

@letsar Please upload the latest version to pub.dev FAST

@esentis
Copy link

esentis commented Dec 12, 2024

@stan-at-work Ok 0.7.0 does resolve the issue, try flutter pub upgrade to also update the pubspec.lock file. Then do a flutter clean && flutter pub get and you will be good to go.

@stan-at-work
Copy link
Author

Thanks @esentis

@saropa
Copy link

saropa commented Dec 12, 2024

Thanks - I appreciate your package!

@letsar
Copy link
Owner

letsar commented Dec 12, 2024

When will this be released ??

Flutter 3.27 just released so this packages is not officialy fucked.

This needs to be fixed ASAP

Hi @stan-at-work, this has been released in the 0.7.0 two months ago, so you should get a DeLorean DMC-12 VERY FAST to come back to the present in order to have the update 😉
image
image

@saropa
Copy link

saropa commented Dec 12, 2024

It's strange — I have def been running 0.70 (cleaned and latest and all that, ofc) many times in the last month. Yet, it just blew up today with the new flutter release. stan-at-work could have been nicer, but is prob dealing with flutter blowing up a project today... as it did our project! For now, we have had to remove the dep on flutter_sticky_header

@stan-at-work
Copy link
Author

It's strange — I have def been running 0.70 (cleaned and latest and all that, ofc) many times in the last month. Yet, it just blew up today with the new flutter release. stan-at-work could have been nicer, but is prob dealing with flutter blowing up a project today... as it did our project! For now, we have had to remove the dep on flutter_sticky_header

@letsar @saropa

Oops sorry 😣 i was a bit to hard.

@letsar
Copy link
Owner

letsar commented Dec 14, 2024

I can understand the frustration but I cannot stand this kind of attitude. We, Open Source maintainers, are also humans. We also have a job, we also need to sleep, we also have a personal life, but we are not someone's slave. We don't have to obey someone because we were kind enough to share code that this person chose to add as a dependency to their project. Do you think this kind of comment makes us want to help the person who wrote it? Spoiler alert: No!

I also had projects broken due to a dependency, and I know I will have it again in the future. When the project is Open Source and has a permissive licence, if I cannot wait, I fork the project, fix it by myself and then do a PR to the project. And in the meantime I depend on my fork until my PR is merged. Is it ideal? No, I know it, but it is the responsibility I took when I chose to depend on the project.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants