Skip to content

[deps] fff.nvim: bump version pin from 0.9.0 to 0.9.4#173

Merged
stanfish06 merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
deps/fff-nvim-0.9.4
Jun 10, 2026
Merged

[deps] fff.nvim: bump version pin from 0.9.0 to 0.9.4#173
stanfish06 merged 1 commit into
masterfrom
deps/fff-nvim-0.9.4

Conversation

@stanfish06

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

What

Bumps the fff.nvim version pin in lua/config/plugins.lua from "0.9.0" to "0.9.4".

Where

lua/config/plugins.lua:10version = vim.version.range("0.9.0")vim.version.range("0.9.4")

Why it matters

The plugin is intentionally pinned (comment: "this package breaks frequently, specify version"), so new releases require a manual bump. v0.9.4 is the latest release as of June 2026. Issue #152 originally tracked updating to v0.9.1; this PR advances directly to the current latest.

After merging

Run :SyncPkgs to apply — vim.pack will resolve the new tag and update nvim-pack-lock.json automatically. The PackChanged autocmd in plugin_config.lua will trigger a binary rebuild if needed.

Test plan

  • Run :SyncPkgs and confirm fff.nvim installs at v0.9.4
  • Verify <leader>ff (find files) and <leader>fg (live grep) still work
  • Confirm the Rust binary rebuilds via the PackChanged autocmd

Advances #152.


Generated by Claude Code

v0.9.4 is the latest release (Jun 2026). The plugin is intentionally
pinned because it breaks frequently; this manually advances the pin.
Run :SyncPkgs to apply — the lock file will update automatically.

Closes part of #152.

https://claude.ai/code/session_01WfHniedWQBWikXmdJFVwur

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 08d837a9fa

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread lua/config/plugins.lua
src = "https://github.com/dmtrKovalenko/fff.nvim",
lazy = true,
version = vim.version.range("0.9.0"),
version = vim.version.range("0.9.4"),

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Pin fff.nvim to an existing release tag

This pins vim.pack to an exact 0.9.4 range, but upstream currently has v0.9.3 and nightly 0.9.4-nightly.* tags, not a stable 0.9.4/v0.9.4 tag; Neovim's vim.version.range() docs also note that suffixed versions like prereleases are not matched by plain range specs. In a clean/update :SyncPkgs run, vim.pack.update() has no matching semver tag to resolve, so the dependency bump cannot actually apply; use an existing stable tag/range or pin the intended nightly tag as a string.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Comment thread lua/config/plugins.lua
src = "https://github.com/dmtrKovalenko/fff.nvim",
lazy = true,
version = vim.version.range("0.9.0"),
version = vim.version.range("0.9.4"),

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P2 Badge Update the pack lock entry with the version bump

Because nvim-pack-lock.json is tracked and still records fff.nvim at the old revision/version, fresh checkouts use the lockfile revision instead of resolving this new spec on the first vim.pack.add() call. That means someone syncing this config can still get fff.nvim 0.9.0 despite this line saying 0.9.4, until they manually run and confirm a pack update; commit the matching lockfile update with the spec bump so the dependency change is reproducible.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@stanfish06 stanfish06 merged commit 4cb4461 into master Jun 10, 2026
4 checks passed
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants