Hi @emilykl,
Thank you for the PR. Please note that the draftlog for this change is missing.
I'm wondering this PR could/should be considered a breaking change for v3.
If you are planning to release a major version, then this PR may belong to v4.
cc: @alexcjohnson

@archmoj Thanks for the catch -- I've added a draftlog!

It's a good point that this is a backward-incompatible change and so strictly speaking should only be introduced in a major version. I'm not psyched about bumping the version number just for this change, but perhaps there are a few other changes we could introduce at the same time. On the other hand, do you know if there are instances in the past where we've made an exception and introduced a change in a minor version?

do you know if there are instances in the past where we've made an exception and introduced a change in a minor version?

No I don't recall. Since v1 we tried to introduce breaking changes in major versions only.
At the moment there is another PR (#7675) merged to the master which could/should considered a breaking change i.e. related to bars with text.
In addition you may also include the following PRs and issues to release v4:
#7696, #7692, #7680, #7536,
#7623, #7598, #7174, #7026.

Note: Holding off on merging this PR until v4 release

A related change that we've talked about a bit, and would be nice to get in alongside this if we're including it in a major release: making a small adjustment to the ranges of one or both of the axes with synced ticks so that the tick values are more precise and (hopefully) need fewer digits displayed.