On 4/20/16 11:09 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
On Wednesday, 20 April 2016 at 23:51:41 UTC, Seb wrote:
Honestly I prefer 1) - the changelog entry can be approved & checked
during the code review on Github and the reviewers can check that such
an addition is provided in the PR. On a new release we can just cat
the files and remove them - having a short and long description is
easy too: `mychange.short.dd` and `mychange.long.dd`. One can simply
`cat *.short.dd *.long.dd` to get the full changelog. Btw grouping of
similar changes is automatically done by the filenames.
Yes. It's not entirely clear how to add things to the changelog, and
conflicts are easy to create.
I will note that any time a PR fixes an issue (and the issue is simply a
bug), there is no need for a changelog entry, as Martin auto-generates a
list of all the bugs fixed. It's those complicated changes, or ones that
have no issue that need an entry.
Agreed.
Previewing the changelogs in the doc tester would be nice too (on my list).
+1, I have no idea how changelog entries look because I have no idea
what the macros do :)
Making it easy to auto-generate the changelog from these files would be
useful for release time as well.
-Steve
