Recent commits to derivepassphrase.git (947a212e444c7ccf03c5005b9ba270e9549794f2)

Fix minor message deviations in the source tree and phrasing in the manpages

2025-02-09T20:58:40+01:00

</pre>

Add message IDs (and missing entries) to the manpage diagnostics listings

2025-02-09T20:47:17+01:00

Using the new quality control scripts, add message IDs to all diagnostic
messages described in the manpages, and add the entries missing from the
manpages as well.
</pre>

Add quality control scripts

2025-02-09T20:47:17+01:00

Add a quality control script `qc_auto.py` that calls the linter, the
formatter, the type checker, the test suite and the documentation
builder, depending on what branch we are on.  It is intended to be
usable as a pre-commit hook.

Add another quality control script `man_diagnostics.py` that checks that
the diagnostics documented in the manpages are complete, and match the
enum values within `derivepassphrase`.  It relies on annotations
(comments) in the manpages to map description texts to the respective
enum values (the mapping is not one-to-one).  It also does
a (rudimentary) check that every warning and error message is mentioned
somewhere in the source tree (besides the messages module that defines
those messages).
</pre>

Prepare `bump-my-version` for this project

2025-02-08T19:58:45+01:00

Prepare and configure the use of `bump-my-version` to automate keeping
version numbers synchronized everywhere.  From a cursory search, this
appears to be the most mature and actively developed tool of this kind
with support for `pyproject.toml` and multiple files with file-specific
replacements.  Some minor warts remain (non-recursive globbing,
duplication of the version number, incorrect calculation of the next
release due to missing true support for pre-release segments), but they
can be worked around, for now.
</pre>

Store the version only in pyproject.toml

2025-02-08T17:24:28+01:00

Establish pyproject.toml functionally as the single source of truth for
the version number, so users can rely on `importlib.metadata.version` to
query the version programmatically [1, 2].  Storing the version number
in the packaging metadata makes it directly accessible to most build
tools statically, instead of dynamically, which in theory would make
certain kinds of operations (reinstall, querying the metadata from a git
checkout) much more tractable [3].  And frankly, the only reason the
version attribute previously was dynamic was incomplete tooling support.
[4, 5]

We still retain the `__version__` attribute -- we need the version
number for the command-line interface and machinery, and querying it via
the installed packages registry is unnecessarily heavyweight -- but only
on the top-level package.  Same goes for the `__author__` attribute.

In future commits, the `__version__` attribute (and version markers in
other files such as the manpages) will be auto-generated by our build
system, commit hooks, or the like.  In general, what we still need is
a system to update all mentions of a version number across the software
package [6].

Further reading:

 1. Python Packaging Authority: [Single-sourcing the Project
    Version](https://packaging.python.org/en/latest/discussions/single-source-version/).
 2. Hynek Schlawek: [Python Packaging
    Metadata](https://hynek.me/articles/packaging-metadata/).
 3. Armin Ronacher: [Constraints are Good: Python's Metadata
    Dilemma](https://lucumr.pocoo.org/2024/11/26/python-packaging-metadata/).
 4. Barry Warsaw: [`hatch version` should be able to handle static
    version numbers](https://github.com/pypa/hatch/issues/1419).
 5. Henry Schreiner: [Support PEP 621
    version?](https://github.com/callowayproject/bump-my-version/issues/66)
 6. Alex Gaynor: [Scaling Software
    Development](https://alexgaynor.net/2020/feb/18/scaling-software-development/).
    "As the scale of a codebase increases, any properties of it which
    are not programmatically enforced will tend to regress."
</pre>

Merge topic branch 'notes-handling' into master

2025-02-07T19:19:19+01:00

* t/notes-handling:
  Document recent changes to notes handling in the changelog
  Optionally support printing vault service notes before the passphrase
  Document the modern editor interface
  Reintroduce a "modern" editor interface à la git-commit or git-rebase
  Warn the user when `derivepassphrase vault --notes` is ineffective
  Use a vault(1)-compatible naive notes editing system
  Use hypothesis for notes handling tests
  Adapt notes printing test to arbitrary notes
  Clean up notes testing functions
  Use a better test for no-op editing notes
  Partially align notes printing and editing behavior with vault(1)
  Assert that notes should be printed (via xfailing test)

GitHub: Closes #18, closes #19.
</pre>

Document recent changes to notes handling in the changelog

2025-02-07T19:09:54+01:00

</pre>

Merge topic branch 'readable-json-dump' into master

2025-02-07T18:17:59+01:00

* t/readable-json-dump:
  Document the change in JSON formatting

GitHub: Closes #20.
</pre>

Document the change in JSON formatting

2025-02-07T18:00:55+01:00

Although, having since also written up the motivation for this change in
the issue tracker, I'm somewhat less convinced of how sensible this
change is (in parts) in the long run.
</pre>

Optionally support printing vault service notes before the passphrase

2025-02-07T16:01:14+01:00

When deriving a passphrase, if the service has any notes, vault(1)
prints the notes after the passphrase.  However, akin to source code
comments before the code in question, service notes may actually be
better placed above the derived passphrase instead, for some types of
notes.  Support such placement via a new command-line option
`--print-notes-before`; the default, vault(1)-compatible behavior can be
explicitly selected via `--print-notes-after`.
</pre>