[Pulp-dev] Release Note Process Improvements

[Ina Panova]

+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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20190527/4d41628c/attachment.htm>