For 2.5.0 I based the change log on the change log of what was then the last/most recent 2.4 release. Anything committed into 2.4 with a fix version of 2.5, I dropped the 2.5 fix version. The 2.5 fix version was kept for anything novel in 2.5. The result was an orderly cumulative change log. I also audited the commit history to make sure no change was committed to 2.4 and not 2.5. This took quite a bit of time. I do not think it can be avoided but needs be done only for the .0 release.
> On Jan 14, 2024, at 2:37 AM, 张铎 <palomino...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Usually we will only set fix version if there is a commit. > > The only exception is for some umbrella issues where we want to put a > fat release note there, such as HBASE-26067. > > This will introduce some difficulties to the RMs as it will cause > mismatches on the commit history and CHANGES.md. But anyway, you need > to manually check the issue if it is missed in the commit history, if > it is an umbrella issue like HBASE-26067, you can just ignore it. > > Thanks. > > Bryan Beaudreault <bbeaudrea...@apache.org> 于2024年1月14日周日 09:27写道： >> >> Hi Devs, >> >> I'm working on auditing the 2.6.0 fixVersion JIRAs in prep for the RC0. One >> thing I'm noticing is there are a couple umbrella JIRAs which have >> fixVersion of 2.6.0 but no corresponding commit in the branch. This is >> because all of the work was done in sub-tasks, and those sub-tasks are in >> the branch. Here's an example: >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-26067 >> >> I'm curious how we want to handle this. On the one hand it seems good to be >> able to 1-to-1 link JIRA fixVersion to commits in branches. On the other >> hand, umbrella are useful aggregators and can be nice for consolidating >> release notes. >> >> Maybe the audit tool I'm working with can just ignore umbrella, or maybe >> umbrella tasks should be handled in a feature branch and eventually merged >> in with the umbrella jira ID. >> >> Thoughts?
