[gis_web] Allow package:web 1.0.0

[ditman]

Brackets the package:web dependency in gis_web to allow for ">=0.5.1 <2.0.0".

Issues

This is needed so we can rebase and land:

• Part of: [web] Update package:web to ">=0.5.1 <2.0.0" #7202

Pre-launch Checklist

• I read the Contributor Guide and followed the process outlined there for submitting PRs.
• I read the Tree Hygiene page, which explains my responsibilities.
• I read and followed the relevant style guides and ran the auto-formatter. (Unlike the flutter/flutter repo, the flutter/packages repo does use dart format.)
• I signed the CLA.
• The title of the PR starts with the name of the package surrounded by square brackets, e.g. [shared_preferences]
• I linked to at least one issue that this PR fixes in the description above.
• I updated pubspec.yaml with an appropriate new version according to the pub versioning philosophy, or this PR is exempt from version changes.
• I updated CHANGELOG.md to add a description of the change, following repository CHANGELOG style, or this PR is exempt from CHANGELOG changes.
• I updated/added relevant documentation (doc comments with ///).
• I added new tests to check the change I am making, or this PR is test-exempt.
• All existing and new tests are passing.

If you need help, consider asking for advice on the #hackers-new channel on Discord.

[ditman]

(First pass, see what CI thinks...)

[flutter-dashboard]

It looks like this pull request may not have tests. Please make sure to add tests before merging. If you need an exemption to this rule, contact "@test-exemption-reviewer" in the #hackers channel in Chat (don't just cc them here, they won't see it! Use Discord!).

If you are not sure if you need tests, consider this rule of thumb: the purpose of a test is to make sure someone doesn't accidentally revert the fix. Ask yourself, is there anything in your PR that you feel it is important we not accidentally revert back to how it was before your fix?

Reviewers: Read the Tree Hygiene page and make sure this patch meets those guidelines before LGTMing.

[ditman]

It's hard to test these, since they're a dependency only. CI seems happy, and I ran the tests as well. (Going to manually test google_sign_in_web real quick, which is not triggered in CI for this change)

------------------------------------------------------------
Run overview:
  packages/google_sign_in/google_sign_in_web - ran

Ran for 1 package(s)


No issues found!

[ditman]

@stuartmorgan I'm attempting to land a migration to web:^1.0.0. I think I can directly update most of the packages, but some dependencies of dependencies need to have a bracket in the web dependency.

I'm trying to get out of this knot, and retry the big merge later.

(Let me know if you have a faster/better/safer idea to do this!)

[stuartmorgan]

(Let me know if you have a faster/better/safer idea to do this!)

This should be entirely safe; I see in CI logs that analyze is indeed resolving to web 1.0.0, and downgrade analyze is still resolving to 0.5.1, so we have analysis coverage of the whole range.

Ranges are totally fine, and in some cases preferable to straight upgrades.