[GH-ISSUE #443] Pull request with backward compatibility breaking changes #375

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-02-28 01:25:00 +03:00 by kerem · 1 comment

kerem commented

2026-02-28 01:25:00 +03:00

Owner

Originally created by @herostrat on GitHub (Oct 18, 2017).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/tzapu/WiFiManager/issues/443

Hey,

I am using the WiFiManager for setting up esps with e.g. mqtt connections.

During development I wanted to change the default value for the params in the webform.
This was not possible with the current code.

I changed the WiFiManagerParamter to use String instead. This enabled me to be more dynamic with the parameters and change them during runtime.

This has the additional value of a more save size allocation without overflows and such without thinking hard and long about array sizes during initialisation of the parameter.

If I missed your reasons for picking const char* instead of String please let me know.

Now my questions:

Are backward compatibility breacking changes a nogo for pull requests?
Are those features a good addition according to your vision of WiFiManager?

I don't want to waste your and my time modifying e.g. examples for a pullrequest if it is not in line with the main development.

Originally created by @herostrat on GitHub (Oct 18, 2017). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/tzapu/WiFiManager/issues/443 Hey, I am using the WiFiManager for setting up esps with e.g. mqtt connections. During development I wanted to change the default value for the params in the webform. This was not possible with the current code. I changed the WiFiManagerParamter to use `String` instead. This enabled me to be more dynamic with the parameters and change them during runtime. This has the additional value of a more save size allocation without overflows and such without thinking hard and long about array sizes during initialisation of the parameter. If I missed your reasons for picking `const char*` instead of `String` please let me know. Now my questions: 1. Are backward compatibility breacking changes a nogo for pull requests? 2. Are those features a good addition according to your vision of WiFiManager? I don't want to waste your and my time modifying e.g. examples for a pullrequest if it is not in line with the main development.

kerem closed this issue

2026-02-28 01:25:00 +03:00

kerem commented

2026-02-28 01:25:01 +03:00

Author

Owner

@tablatronix commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2017):

What problem were you having exactly that needed to be solved.
Breaking change is not great.

if you want to PR it do it from a feature branch

Ideally finding another way to achieve the same result would be good

@tablatronix commented on GitHub (Nov 4, 2017): What problem were you having exactly that needed to be solved. Breaking change is not great. if you want to PR it do it from a feature branch Ideally finding another way to achieve the same result would be good