v2.13.0

[satorg]

Merged

All PRs merged after the v2.12.0 release.

Contributions

All PRs created by contributors.

• Add FunctionN.liftN, parLiftN #4340 by @kubukoz
• add Blue Insight Digital to ADOPTERS.md #4528 by @ahoy196
• Add distinctBy to NonEmptyCollection and all impls #4608 by @cybersaurus
• Add Hash and Order Instances for NonEmptyVector #4612 by @isomarcte
• correct & add documentation links #4613 by @performantdata
• Fix/suppress warnings in kernel and kernel-laws #4614 by @satorg
• Fix typo in Newtype scaladoc #4619 by @i-am-the-slime
• Fix broken internal link #4622 by @bwignall
• Adjust the JVM options to heal the Native build on CI #4623 by @danicheg
• Point to sbt 1.x #4624 by @bwignall
• Issue #4631: Make Later covariant #4632 by @yanns
• Fix typos #4634 by @bwignall
• Add EitherOps#leftMapOrKeep and EitherOps#leftFlatMapOrKeep #4638 by @danicheg
• Replace tut with mdoc on the colophon page #4641 by @danicheg
• Rename root -> cats in build.sbt #4644 by @danicheg
• Fix the broken link on the typeclasses page #4645 by @danicheg
• Fix foldLeft nomenclature signature #4648 by @Masynchin
• Add Defer.recursiveFn to aid in recursion #4656 by @johnynek
• Fix some awkward imports #4659 by @satorg
• Fix Sponsors section #4660 by @valencik
• Add unorderedFoldMapA method #4662 by @m50d
• Update GraalVM from 17 to 21 #4667 by @mzuehlke
• use & instead of with #4673 by @xuwei-k
• Use alignWith in alignMergeWith #4676 by @joroKr21
• Fix alleycats Set Functor ambiguous implicits #4678 by @LaurenceWarne
• Change IPONWEB to Criteo in ADOPTERS.md #4679 by @bio-aeon

Updates

All updates by @typelevel-steward.

• Update auxlib, clib, javalib, nativelib, ... to 0.5.2 #4607
• Update auxlib, clib, javalib, nativelib, ... to 0.5.3 #4609
• Update auxlib, clib, javalib, nativelib, ... to 0.5.4 #4627
• Update auxlib, clib, javalib, nativelib, ... to 0.5.5 #4646
• Update auxlib, clib, javalib, nativelib, ... to 0.5.6 #4675
• Update munit to 1.0.1 #4643
• Update munit to 1.0.2 #4653
• Update sbt to 1.10.1 #4633
• Update sbt to 1.10.2 #4655
• Update sbt to 1.10.3 #4666
• Update sbt to 1.10.4 #4669
• Update sbt to 1.10.5 #4672
• Update sbt, scripted-plugin to 1.10.6 #4683
• Update sbt-buildinfo to 0.13.0 #4671
• Update sbt-buildinfo to 0.13.1 #4674
• Update sbt-doctest to 0.11.0 #4668
• Update sbt-doctest to 0.11.1 #4688
• Update sbt-scalajs, scalajs-compiler, ... to 1.17.0 #4685
• Update sbt-typelevel, sbt-typelevel-site to 0.7.2 #4636
• Update sbt-typelevel, sbt-typelevel-site to 0.7.3 #4651
• Update sbt-typelevel, sbt-typelevel-site to 0.7.4 #4665
• Update scala-library, scala-reflect to 2.12.20 #4649
• Update scala-library, scala-reflect to 2.13.15 #4657
• Update scala3-library, ... to 3.3.4 #4658
• Update scalacheck to 1.18.1 #4654
• Update scalafmt-core to 3.8.2 #4620

Approved

Reviewed PRs that have got at least 1 approval from the organization members.

Ready to be merged

These PRs have no conflicts and expected to be merged soon unless concerns or objections emerge. Additional reviews and approvals are very welcome but not required for these PRs to get them merged.

• Use helper functions in generated code #4303 by @joroKr21 (approved by @satorg)
• Semigroup object additions #4625 by @igstan (approved by @johnynek)
• alleycats - Extract[F[_]] the only way to get the syntax is the deprecated one #4670 by @aluscent (approved by @satorg)
• Aliases traverseVoid/sequenceVoid and their counterparts #4682 by @satorg (approved by @johnynek)
• Update sbt, scripted-plugin to 1.10.7 #4691 by @app/typelevel-steward (approved by @satorg)

Approved, but got conflicts

These PRs have got some conflicts due to recent merges. Therefore they can be merged once the conflicts are resolved.

Ready for Review

PRs that look pretty complete but either haven't been reviewed or approved, or may need some additional work on the comments to get their approvals.

• Redesign NonEmptyLazyList to be maximally lazy #4504 by @NthPortal (reviewed by @armanbilge, @danicheg, @satorg)

[satorg]

There are a couple of PRs in the list (#4528 and #4540) that could be either merged easily or rejected. However I guess, the question on whether to merge or not to merge is more about policies rather than the code itself, isn't it? Are there any formal routines on accepting or rejecting PRs like those two? cc @samspills

[armanbilge]

My opinion is we should no longer accept those sorts of PRs in Cats or other projects' websites. Instead, they should apply to become affiliates and become listed on Typelevel.org. Then, there is a definitive list of projects in our ecosystem that are appropriately OSS licensed and have a Code of Conduct.

[armanbilge]

Oh, I missed that one is an "adopter" rather than a project. We don't currently have it, but I also think those should all just be centralized somewhere on the Typelevel website instead of repeated project-per-project documentation site ...

[samspills]

(I am travelling + doing holiday obligations and don't want to block anything, so I will tag in @typelevel/steering for other folks to chime in!)

[jducoeur]

Yeah, the page for #4528 isn't about projects, it's about companies: just a plain "who uses Cats?"

Their website is a bit under-baked -- it looks like a small company still establishing itself -- but I don't see anything unusual or out of bounds about the PR. I'd probably recommend accepting it. (But I'm not active as a maintainer on Cats, just mainly focused on policy, so I'll leave it to maintainers to merge it.)

I suspect Arman is right that the adoption page should be centralized, decoupled from Cats per se. And I'm not 100% sure whether this sort of page is as good an idea as it used to be: it's potentially an SEO vector, and I suspect we'll need to keep a careful eye on PRs in the age of increasingly automated abuse.

But this looks like a legit usage as things stand: what I see from Blue Insight's webpage does appear to be somewhat TL-oriented.

After New Year's, we should chat about moving this page (and others like it, at least for the Organization projects) to a central location somewhere on typelevel.org.

[djspiewak]

I vote for merging this one as-is and working to centralize later. Better to decouple.

[joroKr21]

Regarding #4303 - I think just nobody reviewed it

[satorg]

FYI: I've updated the description with the most recent changes to the main branch.

I wonder if'd be possible to automate this process, i.e. make the description auto-generated by a script like I use (generate-prerelease-summary.sh) 🤔
And with all the community brains put together we could make the script even better I guess.

[mzuehlke]

Maybe https://github.com/release-drafter/release-drafter could be used for this. But I have till now used it only to generate release notes based labeled pull requests.

[satorg]

Turns out that #4678 got conflicts and cannot be merged even though it is approved. I've updated the script to keep PRs like that one tracked and updated the description here after that 🤷

[kubukoz]

looks like that PR is mergeable again :)

[satorg]

Would we like to assign a specific date for the release? So that everything that will have been approved by that date gets merged and therefore released automatically (unless any concerns emerge by that date), wdyt?

We can schedule it tentatively on, let's say, Jan 1st 😅 but any other date would work too, of course.

[satorg]

FYI: updated the discussion board again.