[GH-ISSUE #4757] v1.3.x maintaince plan #18682

Closed
opened 2026-04-15 17:16:16 -05:00 by GiteaMirror · 13 comments
Owner

Originally created by @himself65 on GitHub (Sep 18, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/issues/4757

We want to improve the stability of each major/minor version. So after talking about it, we are not adding more features after v1.3.12.

The only new feature between 1.3.10~1.3.11 is the database transaction. Database transaction enabled by default causes some database regression for users. Sorry for the inconvenience; we have fixed this in 1.3.12 by turning it off by default. Even though it helps a lot with error handling but we should use it in the next minor version 1.4

Now, we are only adding plugin fixes and non-breaking features. And we have set the branch to 1.3.x-latest as the target branch.

If you think any bug is urgent to fix, feel free to re-post here.

Covered issues

https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/milestone/6

Previous Versions

1.3.13

https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/releases/tag/v1.3.13

1.3.14

https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/releases/tag/v1.3.14

1.3.15

https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/releases/tag/v1.3.15

1.3.24

https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/releases/tag/v1.3.24

Originally created by @himself65 on GitHub (Sep 18, 2025). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/issues/4757 We want to improve the stability of each major/minor version. So after talking about it, we are not adding more features after v1.3.12. The only new feature between 1.3.10~1.3.11 is the [database transaction](https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/commit/7efd139b). Database transaction enabled by default causes some database regression for users. Sorry for the inconvenience; we have fixed this in 1.3.12 by turning it off by default. Even though it helps a lot with error handling but we should use it in the next minor version 1.4 Now, we are only adding plugin fixes and non-breaking features. And we have set the branch to `1.3.x-latest` as the target branch. **If you think any bug is urgent to fix, feel free to re-post here.** ### Covered issues https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/milestone/6 <details> <summary>Previous Versions</summary> #### 1.3.13 https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/releases/tag/v1.3.13 #### 1.3.14 https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/releases/tag/v1.3.14 #### 1.3.15 https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/releases/tag/v1.3.15 </details> #### 1.3.24 https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/releases/tag/v1.3.24
GiteaMirror added the locked label 2026-04-15 17:16:16 -05:00
Author
Owner

@linardsblk commented on GitHub (Sep 19, 2025):

Just updated from v1.3.7 to v1.3.12 in order to access the transactions feature but got blocked due incompatible node version (using v20.17). Usually these kind of breaking changes are reserved for major or at least minor version updates.

error @noble/hashes@2.0.0: The engine "node" is incompatible with this module. Expected version ">= 20.19.0". Got "20.17.0"

<!-- gh-comment-id:3312526815 --> @linardsblk commented on GitHub (Sep 19, 2025): Just updated from v1.3.7 to v1.3.12 in order to access the transactions feature but got blocked due incompatible node version (using v20.17). Usually these kind of breaking changes are reserved for major or at least minor version updates. `error @noble/hashes@2.0.0: The engine "node" is incompatible with this module. Expected version ">= 20.19.0". Got "20.17.0"`
Author
Owner

@himself65 commented on GitHub (Sep 19, 2025):

Just updated from v1.3.7 to v1.3.12 in order to access the transactions feature but got blocked due incompatible node version (using v20.17). Usually these kind of breaking changes are reserved for major or at least minor version updates.

error @noble/hashes@2.0.0: The engine "node" is incompatible with this module. Expected version ">= 20.19.0". Got "20.17.0"

We don't consider the non-LTS Node.js version support. Please bump the version

<!-- gh-comment-id:3313379763 --> @himself65 commented on GitHub (Sep 19, 2025): > Just updated from v1.3.7 to v1.3.12 in order to access the transactions feature but got blocked due incompatible node version (using v20.17). Usually these kind of breaking changes are reserved for major or at least minor version updates. > > `error @noble/hashes@2.0.0: The engine "node" is incompatible with this module. Expected version ">= 20.19.0". Got "20.17.0"` We don't consider the non-LTS Node.js version support. Please bump the version
Author
Owner

@coderrshyam commented on GitHub (Sep 20, 2025):

@himself65 The way versioning is being done feels a bit unprofessional.

Instead of creating many sub-versions under the same minor release, it’s better to release proper versions like 1.3, 1.4, and so on.

  • For urgent code changes like bug fixes, release a patch version.
  • For small new features, a minor version is sufficient.
  • For bigger features or any breaking changes, release a major version.

Also, for small patch updates, there’s no need to use Canary releases — you can keep it simple by following the Next.js release pattern.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3314896788 --> @coderrshyam commented on GitHub (Sep 20, 2025): @himself65 The way versioning is being done feels a bit **unprofessional**. Instead of creating many sub-versions under the same minor release, it’s better to release proper versions like `1.3`, `1.4`, and so on. - For **urgent code changes** like bug fixes, release a **patch version**. - For **small new features**, a **minor version** is sufficient. - For **bigger features** or any **breaking changes**, release a **major version**. Also, for **small patch updates**, there’s no need to use **Canary releases** — you can keep it simple by following the **Next.js release pattern**.
Author
Owner

@nadilas commented on GitHub (Sep 21, 2025):

@himself65 can we get c448ac0407 out fast?

containing https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/pull/4765

<!-- gh-comment-id:3315992260 --> @nadilas commented on GitHub (Sep 21, 2025): @himself65 can we get c448ac040706ec481055463d8f33edb8aef7f23d out fast? containing https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/pull/4765
Author
Owner

@himself65 commented on GitHub (Sep 22, 2025):

@himself65 The way versioning is being done feels a bit unprofessional.

Instead of creating many sub-versions under the same minor release, it’s better to release proper versions like 1.3, 1.4, and so on.

  • For urgent code changes like bug fixes, release a patch version.
  • For small new features, a minor version is sufficient.
  • For bigger features or any breaking changes, release a major version.

Also, for small patch updates, there’s no need to use Canary releases — you can keep it simple by following the Next.js release pattern.

Yeah, you are right. That's why we are trying to stabilize things in the coming version. We are concern and prioritize users' feedback and maintainability. We definitely will have clear versioning and a migration guide for coming new things coming

<!-- gh-comment-id:3320167171 --> @himself65 commented on GitHub (Sep 22, 2025): > [@himself65](https://github.com/himself65) The way versioning is being done feels a bit **unprofessional**. > > Instead of creating many sub-versions under the same minor release, it’s better to release proper versions like `1.3`, `1.4`, and so on. > > * For **urgent code changes** like bug fixes, release a **patch version**. > * For **small new features**, a **minor version** is sufficient. > * For **bigger features** or any **breaking changes**, release a **major version**. > > Also, for **small patch updates**, there’s no need to use **Canary releases** — you can keep it simple by following the **Next.js release pattern**. Yeah, you are right. That's why we are trying to stabilize things in the coming version. We are concern and prioritize users' feedback and maintainability. We definitely will have clear versioning and a migration guide for coming new things coming
Author
Owner

@himself65 commented on GitHub (Sep 22, 2025):

@himself65 can we get c448ac0 out fast?

containing #4765

Please check 1.3.14

<!-- gh-comment-id:3320179065 --> @himself65 commented on GitHub (Sep 22, 2025): > [@himself65](https://github.com/himself65) can we get [c448ac0](https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/commit/c448ac040706ec481055463d8f33edb8aef7f23d) out fast? > > containing [#4765](https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/pull/4765) Please check 1.3.14
Author
Owner

@nadilas commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2025):

do you think it is related to the new patch that the schema generation doesn't run after upgrade?

2025-09-23T03:40:09.339Z ERROR [Better Auth]: [#better-auth]: Couldn't read your auth config. TypeError: z.coerce.boolean(...).meta is not a function
    at file:///Users/nadilas/workspace/.../node_modules/better-auth/dist/shared/better-auth.CBY7cUGy.mjs:61:44


const getSessionQuerySchema = z.optional(
  z.object({
    /**
     * If cookie cache is enabled, it will disable the cache
     * and fetch the session from the database
     */
>>>>    disableCookieCache: z.coerce.boolean().meta({
      description: "Disable cookie cache and fetch session from database"
    }).optional(),
    disableRefresh: z.coerce.boolean().meta({
      description: "Disable session refresh. Useful for checking session status, without updating the session"
    }).optional()
  })
);

<!-- gh-comment-id:3322294738 --> @nadilas commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2025): do you think it is related to the new patch that the schema generation doesn't run after upgrade? ``` 2025-09-23T03:40:09.339Z ERROR [Better Auth]: [#better-auth]: Couldn't read your auth config. TypeError: z.coerce.boolean(...).meta is not a function at file:///Users/nadilas/workspace/.../node_modules/better-auth/dist/shared/better-auth.CBY7cUGy.mjs:61:44 const getSessionQuerySchema = z.optional( z.object({ /** * If cookie cache is enabled, it will disable the cache * and fetch the session from the database */ >>>> disableCookieCache: z.coerce.boolean().meta({ description: "Disable cookie cache and fetch session from database" }).optional(), disableRefresh: z.coerce.boolean().meta({ description: "Disable session refresh. Useful for checking session status, without updating the session" }).optional() }) ); ```
Author
Owner

@himself65 commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2025):

do you think it is related to the new patch that the schema generation doesn't run after upgrade?

2025-09-23T03:40:09.339Z ERROR [Better Auth]: [#better-auth]: Couldn't read your auth config. TypeError: z.coerce.boolean(...).meta is not a function
    at file:///Users/nadilas/workspace/.../node_modules/better-auth/dist/shared/better-auth.CBY7cUGy.mjs:61:44


const getSessionQuerySchema = z.optional(
  z.object({
    /**
     * If cookie cache is enabled, it will disable the cache
     * and fetch the session from the database
     */
>>>>    disableCookieCache: z.coerce.boolean().meta({
      description: "Disable cookie cache and fetch session from database"
    }).optional(),
    disableRefresh: z.coerce.boolean().meta({
      description: "Disable session refresh. Useful for checking session status, without updating the session"
    }).optional()
  })
);

Please check Zod version, the function in v3 and v4 has a lot of change

<!-- gh-comment-id:3322314480 --> @himself65 commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2025): > do you think it is related to the new patch that the schema generation doesn't run after upgrade? > > ``` > 2025-09-23T03:40:09.339Z ERROR [Better Auth]: [#better-auth]: Couldn't read your auth config. TypeError: z.coerce.boolean(...).meta is not a function > at file:///Users/nadilas/workspace/.../node_modules/better-auth/dist/shared/better-auth.CBY7cUGy.mjs:61:44 > > > const getSessionQuerySchema = z.optional( > z.object({ > /** > * If cookie cache is enabled, it will disable the cache > * and fetch the session from the database > */ > >>>> disableCookieCache: z.coerce.boolean().meta({ > description: "Disable cookie cache and fetch session from database" > }).optional(), > disableRefresh: z.coerce.boolean().meta({ > description: "Disable session refresh. Useful for checking session status, without updating the session" > }).optional() > }) > ); > ``` Please check Zod version, the function in v3 and v4 has a lot of change
Author
Owner

@nadilas commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2025):

Yeah, exactly my thinking. I already upgraded from zod@v3 to zod@v4, same error though. 🤔

....except 1 package out of 11 packages. 😂 👍 resolved

<!-- gh-comment-id:3322320562 --> @nadilas commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2025): Yeah, exactly my thinking. I already upgraded from zod@v3 to zod@v4, same error though. 🤔 ....except 1 package out of 11 packages. 😂 👍 resolved
Author
Owner

@jippi commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2025):

I filed #4837 for the Zod 3 issue

<!-- gh-comment-id:3323449011 --> @jippi commented on GitHub (Sep 23, 2025): I filed #4837 for the Zod 3 issue
Author
Owner

@Ziothh commented on GitHub (Oct 7, 2025):

@himself65 Would it be possible to release the changes from #4919 in a v1.3.x version?
It solves #4453, which is also a blocking feature for my company to move from next-auth to better-auth.

I know it's in 1.4.0-beta.8, but it's a hard sell to use beta versions in production :)

<!-- gh-comment-id:3377303048 --> @Ziothh commented on GitHub (Oct 7, 2025): @himself65 Would it be possible to release the changes from #4919 in a `v1.3.x` version? It solves #4453, which is also a blocking feature for my company to move from next-auth to better-auth. I know it's in [1.4.0-beta.8](https://www.npmjs.com/package/better-auth/v/1.4.0-beta.8), but it's a hard sell to use beta versions in production :)
Author
Owner

@himself65 commented on GitHub (Oct 7, 2025):

@himself65 Would it be possible to release the changes from #4919 in a v1.3.x version? It solves #4453, which is also a blocking feature for my company to move from next-auth to better-auth.

I know it's in 1.4.0-beta.8, but it's a hard sell to use beta versions in production :)

I think we already have the commit in the 1.3 branch. No?

<!-- gh-comment-id:3378323089 --> @himself65 commented on GitHub (Oct 7, 2025): > [@himself65](https://github.com/himself65) Would it be possible to release the changes from [#4919](https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/pull/4919) in a `v1.3.x` version? It solves [#4453](https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/issues/4453), which is also a blocking feature for my company to move from next-auth to better-auth. > > I know it's in [1.4.0-beta.8](https://www.npmjs.com/package/better-auth/v/1.4.0-beta.8), but it's a hard sell to use beta versions in production :) I think we already have the commit in the 1.3 branch. No?
Author
Owner

@himself65 commented on GitHub (Nov 13, 2025):

We are release 1.4 soon

<!-- gh-comment-id:3529706521 --> @himself65 commented on GitHub (Nov 13, 2025): We are release 1.4 soon
Sign in to join this conversation.
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/better-auth#18682