It turns out there are a couple of extra steps in the workflow for submitting a PR via the GitHub web interface for those
who don't have write access in the repository. I missed these while developing the instructions due to having write
access.
The process is intended to be as simple, fast, and flexible as possible for the submitter. For this reason, there is
absolutely no expectation regarding where in `repositories.txt` the library repository URL should be added. The system
will work fine no matter if it's at the start, end, alphabetical order, or some random spot. If we do want to restore
alphabetical order periodically, a maintainer can easily do that.
For this reason, there was previously no mention of the proper location in the list for submitters to use, since there is
none. However, this ambiguity might actually make the process less friendly to those who are left wondering. So it's best
to explicitly state that the location doesn't matter.
This link was intended to provide readily accessible information on what the term "fork" means in this context. However,
it comes directly after mention a link, which is referencing the URL provided later in the sentence. This might result in
confusion about which of the two links is meant. Most library submitters will already know the meaning of the term "fork"
and those who don't will be able to find information about it easily enough, including by visiting the information about
pull requests linked to earlier in the document. So I think that it's better to remove this link.
This change to the "Manage PRs" workflow will cause the "github-actions" bot to add an approval pull request review to
submission PRs after they have passed all compliance checks, but before merging.
This is necessary to allow us to instate the "Require pull request reviews before merging" branch protection rule on
`main`, which will protect the repository from accidental pushes by the maintainers and administrators with write
permissions in the repository.
As an added benefit, this will more clearly indicate the status of a submission in the case where it is fully compliant
with the Library Manager requirements but an automated merge is not possible due to a merge conflict. In this case, the
bot will add an approval each time the workflow is triggered, but that is a reasonable behavior, and one permitted by the
PR review system (i.e., subsequent approvals will not cause a spurious workflow run failure, with either workflow trigger
event type).
The library submission instructions contained a step for selecting a radio button before committing. This radio button
only exists when editing a file in a repository you have write access to, which is why I encountered it while developing
the instructions.
Library submitters will not have these radio buttons and so instructions for using a non-existent UI element would
cause confusion.
We are no longer supporting the alteration of library releases. A release should be an immutable snapshot of the library.
Having multiple revisions of a library with the same identifier can cause confusion for the users and no need for a
library maintainer to do it since they can more easily make a new release, removing the old one from the repository if
absolutely necessary.
We will always provide support for removing problematic releases from the Library Manager index, and the FAQ provides
instructions for that procedure.
RAK13005-TLE7259-Library - RAKwireless library for RAK13005 LIN bus module with TLE7259 transceiver IC
RAK-MQx-Library - RAKWireless library for the WisBlock MQx Gas Sensor Modules
Use this library to log debug information from your code while running ATtiny85 projects on the [Wokwi Arduino Simulator](https://wokwi.com). It provides an interface similar to the familiar Serial object.
