I don't think a raw dump of PRs is right for release notes even if the commit messages are perfectly written by God. It's too low level for almost everyone, and the people who really do want commit-level detail can just use git, which is a better tool for exploring history than a static text file.
On Thu, Dec 2, 2021 at 5:12 AM Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello community, > > There is an open discussion on the Pulsar 2.9.0 release notes PR: > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12425 > > I have created the block of release notes by downloading the list of PR > using some GitHub API. > Then I have manually classified: > - News and Noteworthy: cool things in the Release > - Breaking Changes: things you MUST know when you upgrade > - Java Client, C++ Client, Python Client, Functions/Pulsar IO > > The goal is to provide useful information for people who want to upgrade > Pulsar. > > My problems are: > - PR titles are often badly written, but I don't want to fix all of them > (typos, tenses of verbs, formatting) > - There are more than 300 PRs, I don't want to classify them manually, I > just highlighted the most important from my point of view > > If for 2.9.0 we still keep a list of PR, then I believe that the current > status of the patch is good. > > If we want to do it another way, then I am now asking if there is someone > who can volunteer in fixing and classifying the list of 300 PRs, it is a > huge task. > > There is already much more work to do to get 2.9.0 completely released (and > also PulsarAdapters) and we have to cut 2.9.1 as soon as possible due to a > bad regression found in 2.9.0. > > Thanks > Enrico > -- Jonathan Ellis co-founder, http://www.datastax.com @spyced
