Bump @ledgerhq/ledger-bitcoin to 0.3.1
What the developer wrote
Authored by Salvatore Ingala
Bump @ledgerhq/ledger-bitcoin to 0.3.1
What changed, and why it matters
This commit is a routine version bump for a JavaScript package from 0.3.0 to 0.3.1. It only changes two package metadata files and contains no code changes. There is no indication of a security fix or vulnerability.
No security action required. Treat as a normal maintenance/versioning commit.
Security signals we found
No strong security signals were identified.
Evidence from the diff
The commit updates the version field in bitcoin_client_js/package.json and bitcoin_client_js/package-lock.json from 0.3.0 to 0.3.1. No source code, dependencies, or lockfile dependency tree entries are modified. The diff is purely a metadata version increment plus a minor whitespace change (missing trailing newline).
Changed components
Inspect captured patch +4 / −4
diff --git a/bitcoin_client_js/package-lock.json b/bitcoin_client_js/package-lock.json
index 002e95f..399e549 100644
--- a/bitcoin_client_js/package-lock.json
+++ b/bitcoin_client_js/package-lock.json
@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
{
"name": "@ledgerhq/ledger-bitcoin",
- "version": "0.3.0",
+ "version": "0.3.1",
"lockfileVersion": 3,
"requires": true,
"packages": {
"": {
"name": "@ledgerhq/ledger-bitcoin",
- "version": "0.3.0",
+ "version": "0.3.1",
"license": "Apache-2.0",
"dependencies": {
"@bitcoinerlab/descriptors": "^3.0.6",
diff --git a/bitcoin_client_js/package.json b/bitcoin_client_js/package.json
index 9bc27c2..08948b8 100644
--- a/bitcoin_client_js/package.json
+++ b/bitcoin_client_js/package.json
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
{
"name": "@ledgerhq/ledger-bitcoin",
- "version": "0.3.0",
+ "version": "0.3.1",
"description": "Ledger Hardware Wallet Bitcoin Application Client",
"main": "build/main/index.js",
"types": "build/main/index.d.ts",
@@ -68,4 +68,4 @@
"prettier": {
"singleQuote": true
}
-}
+}
\ No newline at end of file
Why this scored 15/100
Community notes
Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.
The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.