[Pulp-dev] Release Note Process Improvements

Ina Panova ipanova at redhat.com
Thu Jun 6 11:10:19 UTC 2019 

Thank you Brian for moving this forward. That's a good improvement!


--------
Regards,

Ina Panova
Senior Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.

"Do not go where the path may lead,
 go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."


On Tue, Jun 4, 2019 at 4:39 PM Brian Bouterse <bbouters at redhat.com> wrote:

> The towncrier release process [0] is now in place for the repositories
> below. Although this proposal discussed adoption for pulpcore specifically,
> in collaboration w/ plugin teams on IRC, it was applied more broadly.
>
> pulpcore, pulpcore-plugin, plugin_template, pulp_file, pulp_rpm,
> pulp_ansible, pulp_docker, pulp_python, pulp-certguard
>
> ## Start adding release notes
> Each plugin got doc updates w/ the process on how to add release notes
> now. Please start checking these notes in in all ^ repos w/ your commits.
>
> ## See what it looks like
> You can run `towncrier --draft` in the root of any ^ repo and it'll print
> out the release notes it would have produced. If you run it without --draft
> it will add the actual content to CHANGES.rst and stage those changes. When
> you run it without --draft it prompts to remove all the notes from CHANGES
> so once they go to the changelog they don't get regnerated. So that means
> we only generate just before we release and if you want to know what's
> different in source look at the CHANGES directory directly.
>
> ## File Usages
> The CHANGES.rst is intended for the changelog for the most recent release
> only. The HISTORY.rst file contains the changelogs of all previous releases
> appended. The Sphinx docs bring both of these files together as if they are
> on on the documentation site, this is just a common Python file arrangement
> I've seen in many successful projects. This means that you'll want to move
> contents from the CHANGES.rst file to the HISTORY.rst periodically.
>
> ## Gotchas
> The very first set of notes you produce need a tiny manual touchup to
> remove the '-------' at the end. Otherwise Sphinx will fail to build.
> Subsequent generated notes will require no updates (so the template is
> already correct). After you run towncrier you can run Sphinx locally to be
> sure you're generated notes are good to go.
>
> ## Adding to your plugin
> To adopt a similar change in $your_plugin this is probably the best PR to
> look at: https://github.com/pulp/pulp_python/pull/245
>
> ## Version string duplication
> FYI, also with this work all the above repos got version string
> duplication. While working on ^, towncrier wanted a __version__ and I
> learned that de-duplicating across setup.py and __version__ is kind of
> hazardous. So after much back-and-forth the current pattern looks like
> this:   https://github.com/pulp/pulp_rpm/pull/1363/files   The issues
> motivating this design is that setup.py isn't around on installed systems,
> and both towncrier and Read The Docs want to know __version__ but *dont'*
> want to install the package.
>
> I plan to send another proposal this week on adopting 'bumpversion' so we
> never get this duplicated aspect wrong. Any questions or concerns on what
> has been already done is welcome.
>
> [0]: https://pulp.plan.io/projects/pulp/wiki/Pulp3_Release_Guide
>
> Thanks,
> Brian
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 4:00 PM Brian Bouterse <bbouters at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Great with the issue groomed, and much +1 feedback I think we should put
>> it in place soon so we can start having an accurate changelog for rc3. I am
>> planning to pick this up and so I've taken the issue as assigned. I'll post
>> PRs on this thread so everyone can see once they area available (hopefully
>> tomorrow or Thurs at latest).
>>
>> More comments, ideas, or concerns are also welcome.
>>
>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 3:53 PM Daniel Alley <dalley at redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 2:23 PM Dennis Kliban <dkliban at redhat.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> +1
>>>>
>>>> I updated the task[0] slightly and marked it as groomed.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [0] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4875
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 12:14 PM Austin Macdonald <austin at redhat.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The proposed changes look awesome! I'm +1 for moving forward with it
>>>>> for pulpcore and pulpcore-plugin.
>>>>>
>>>>> If there is consensus (looks like we are close), lets go ahead. If
>>>>> anyone has concerns, we also have the option to implement this change for
>>>>> one plugin before we go all in.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, May 27, 2019 at 5:26 AM Ina Panova <ipanova at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> +1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --------
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ina Panova
>>>>>> Senior Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Do not go where the path may lead,
>>>>>>  go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, May 25, 2019 at 10:18 PM Tatiana Tereshchenko <
>>>>>> ttereshc at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> +1 to improve release notes process
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If we decide to use PR numbers and not redmine issues in the release
>>>>>>> notes, then there will be no limitation/requirement to have a redmine issue
>>>>>>> to add something to the release notes.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Tanya
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 3:46 PM David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +1 to bmbouter's proposal and not including '[noissue]' items in
>>>>>>>> release notes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> David
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 3:52 AM Matthias Dellweg <dellweg at atix.de>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I am fine with stating "[noissue] means 'not worth mentioning in
>>>>>>>>> release notes'".
>>>>>>>>> This would require the reviewer to decide to tell the contributor:
>>>>>>>>> "We
>>>>>>>>> want that to be part of the release notes. Please open up a
>>>>>>>>> ticket."
>>>>>>>>> And that process scales better than handpicking the notes in the
>>>>>>>>> end.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 23 May 2019 16:22:36 -0400
>>>>>>>>> Dana Walker <dawalker at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> > My initial thought is this looks useful to the user and very
>>>>>>>>> clean.
>>>>>>>>> > I've also found it to be a burden trying to write good release
>>>>>>>>> notes,
>>>>>>>>> > having to dig through commits and try to decide what's important
>>>>>>>>> > enough and what's not, so +1 to trying to improve this process
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> > both the releaser and user.
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > However:
>>>>>>>>> > "towncrier works best in a development system where all merges
>>>>>>>>> involve
>>>>>>>>> > closing a ticket."
>>>>>>>>> > We frequently make use of "[noissue]" in our PRs, in part to
>>>>>>>>> lower the
>>>>>>>>> > burden on contributors making small fixes.  Would we want to
>>>>>>>>> move to a
>>>>>>>>> > model where we *must* have an issue?  Are we instead assuming
>>>>>>>>> those
>>>>>>>>> > items are small enough that the user doesn't need to see it in
>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>> > release notes?
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Thoughts?
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > --Dana
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Dana Walker
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > She / Her / Hers
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Software Engineer, Pulp Project
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > dawalker at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>> > <https://www.redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > On Thu, May 23, 2019 at 3:49 PM Brian Bouterse <
>>>>>>>>> bbouters at redhat.com>
>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>>> > > In discussion with some other devs, I've realized that
>>>>>>>>> pulpcore and
>>>>>>>>> > > pulpcore-plugin would benefit from better release notes. Here
>>>>>>>>> are
>>>>>>>>> > > some of the reasons that have come up:
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> > > * The release notes are incomplete. One person tries to go
>>>>>>>>> through
>>>>>>>>> > > and write release notes just before the release happens, and by
>>>>>>>>> > > that point, the number of changes are too many for this
>>>>>>>>> approach to
>>>>>>>>> > > produce complete and robust notes.
>>>>>>>>> > > * They are hard to produce. Producing "all the release notes"
>>>>>>>>> is a
>>>>>>>>> > > mentally difficult task.
>>>>>>>>> > > * We try to substitute with Redmine, but this approach limits
>>>>>>>>> us
>>>>>>>>> > > (a) it's now difficult and time consuming to see what changed,
>>>>>>>>> (b)
>>>>>>>>> > > there is way more detail than you actually want, and they
>>>>>>>>> aren't
>>>>>>>>> > > self-contained (can't be browsed off-line).
>>>>>>>>> > > * overall all ^ leads to both users and plugin writers feeling
>>>>>>>>> > > uncertain about what has changed in the last release, week, or
>>>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>>>> > > day.
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> > > So what can we do? Recently I contributed to aiohttp and I
>>>>>>>>> found
>>>>>>>>> > > their release note process light and easy. It produces
>>>>>>>>> high-quality
>>>>>>>>> > > release notes like these:
>>>>>>>>> > > https://aiohttp.readthedocs.io/en/stable/changes.html
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> > > You can read about their process here:
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> https://aiohttp.readthedocs.io/en/stable/contributing.html#changelog-update
>>>>>>>>> > > You can see some examples of these release note files in their
>>>>>>>>> repo
>>>>>>>>> > > here: https://github.com/aio-libs/aiohttp/tree/master/CHANGES
>>>>>>>>> > > Overall it makes use of the towncrier project
>>>>>>>>> > > https://github.com/hawkowl/towncrier
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> > > What do you all think about trying something like this for
>>>>>>>>> pulpcore
>>>>>>>>> > > and pulpcore-plugin? Please write back on-list with thoughts,
>>>>>>>>> > > ideas, concerns, alternatives, etc.
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> > > Also, I made us a starter issue to coalesce some more of the
>>>>>>>>> > > practical aspect of adopting a change like this:
>>>>>>>>> > > https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4875
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> > > All the best,
>>>>>>>>> > > Brian
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> > > Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>> > > Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>> > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>> > >
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pulp-dev mailing list
>>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20190606/fc8c0502/attachment.htm>

More information about the Pulp-dev mailing list