Related to this discussion, what's the current policy / practice around linking to tickets from the release notes? It looks the release notes for patch releases already link to tickets, e.g. https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/releases/3.2.6/
However, for feature release, it looks like the tickets aren't linked to, e.g. https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/releases/3.2/ https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/dev/releases/4.0/ Is the difference deliberate? Is it currently being done manually for patch releases -- is that why it's being done / can only be done there? --Chris On Wednesday, August 18, 2021 at 3:37:21 AM UTC-4 carlton...@gmail.com wrote: > Hey David. > > Thanks for the follow-up here. > > I think at least for 4.0 we should focus on adding callouts/recognition to > the release blog post, rather than the release notes. > > For one, release notes only contain new features, and we want to call out > all the different contributions that don’t fall under that. The bug fixes, > the docs changes, the translations teams, triage and review folks, and so > on… — there’s much more than just new features. It would be nice to call > out the new contributors (and the old too, but especially the new) — I > think we can (and have time) to pull together something good in the more > discursive format the release announcement allows. > > For another, more narrowly practical point, I’d like a test-bed before we > change the release note process, which is part of our daily workflow. Doing > it in the release announcement is a one-shot opportunity to try ideas and > see how it goes. If there are elements we then want to bring into the > release notes going forward then that’s open. (But softly, softly… being > the thought.) > > Kind Regards, > > Carlton > > > On 18 Aug 2021, at 09:20, smi...@gmail.com <smi...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi All, > > Just coming back to this again (time flies), although we've got a while > until 4.0 is released so no rush here. > > I've got a few different thoughts here: > > *Data* > > I had a look at the various tools discussed above to see if any give us > what we need. While on that journey I came accross git's `shortlog`. > Apparently git use this to create their release notes, there's a few > options here but something like the following will give the list of > contributors (and number of commits) since 3.2. > > What I like about this is it "coalesce together commits by the same > person". The other tools above would have resulted in a number of different > entries for many folk as they use different email addresses (or their > GitHub "email" gets used). > > $ git shortlog 3.2..main -n -s --group=author > --group=trailer:co-authored-by > > I'm not quite sure how git then get to new and returning users, but > presumably that could be a fairly short script to work out the new names > since 3.2. > > *Release Notes* > > Adding names and tickets seemed to receive a positive response earlier in > the year. So the question here, is what format? > > Python uses a couple of different formats > 1) <Link to Ticket> : <Description> : Patch by <Name> > 2) <Description> (Contributed by <Name> in <Ticket>) > > I think the main thing is to choose something, does anyone have a > preference, either one of the above styles or something different? (My vote > would be for the second option above) > > [1] https://docs.python.org/3/whatsnew/changelog.html > [2] https://docs.python.org/3/whatsnew/3.8.html > > *Events* > > Responding to Tom's point above, I think we'd want to reach out to one of > the organisers of an event to see if folk would be interested in exploring > this further. It's far more complex than "just" adding some text to a > release note. However, given that it's a gathering of Django folk it seems > like an opportunity to do _something_. > > While I've seen what recognition can look like at corporate events those > tend to rely on being Exclusive (think VIP areas et al), rather than > Inclusive. I suspect for a Django conference/event we'd want to do > something quite different. > > Kind Regards > > David > On Wednesday, 7 July 2021 at 21:52:14 UTC+1 t...@carrick.eu wrote: > >> This is something I've been thinking about a bit as well. >> >> Mostly I think adding authors to the release notes is probably the best >> bang for buck in terms of recognition. This is what I was mostly thinking >> about myself. The release notes are (I believe) very widely read, >> especially in comparison with anything on GitHub. >> >> The other suggestions are, I think, good and worthwhile, but probably not >> as impactful. >> >> I am interested / curious about your last point. I think adding some >> recognition to in person events might be nice, but I'm not sure what it >> would look like in practice. >> >> Tom >> >> On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 at 17:38, 'Adam Johnson' via Django developers >> (Contributions to Django itself) <django-d...@googlegroups.com> wrote: >> >>> I'm all for exposing names in more places. >>> >>> Linking through to PR's from the release notes would also be useful for >>> "pulling back the curtain" and making Django's code a bit less magical. >>> Plus it could help the workflow for current contributors. >>> >>> On Mon, 5 Jul 2021 at 16:07, Tom Forbes <t...@tomforb.es> wrote: >>> >>>> Perhaps we could do this as part of a Sphinx plugin? Right now each >>>> entry in the release notes is only implicitly tied to the pull request >>>> that >>>> adds it. >>>> >>>> If we could add some kind of pull request ID marker to the release note >>>> entries we could create an inline link to the PR (which might be very >>>> useful by itself) as well as using it derive a list of contributors for >>>> each release. >>>> >>>> Tom >>>> >>>> On Wed, 30 Jun 2021 at 09:16, Carlton Gibson <carlton...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi David, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for this. Yes. >>>>> >>>>> Let's assume the 2020-2021 time filter is in place. >>>>> >>>>> Mariusz recently picked up James' PR to add the list of Core >>>>> Contributors (back) to the website, which is/was part of the DEP 10 >>>>> governance changes. >>>>> https://github.com/django/djangoproject.com/pull/1099 >>>>> >>>>> The hope is that the DSF Board will approve that in their next >>>>> meeting, and we can get it live. With hindsight we perhaps could have >>>>> moved >>>>> quicker but, the idea was to move on from there to recognise current and >>>>> new contributors on a more ongoing basis too. >>>>> >>>>> So... my hope was to probably do something per-major release — so 3.2, >>>>> 4.0, 4.1, etc. (Maybe we could do it every month but...) >>>>> >>>>> * Who were the contributors? >>>>> * Who were the new contributors?(Special callout) >>>>> * Who was on the Triage and Review team? ('cause it ain't just code) >>>>> * And, can we identify other folks to call out...? (T&R team was an >>>>> attempt to capture participation here.) >>>>> >>>>> I think Simon's github-to-sqlite tool is a good candidate. >>>>> Some others I've collected whilst this has been bubbling on the >>>>> low-ring: >>>>> >>>>> * Katie McLaughlin provided some git log pointers >>>>> https://glasnt.com/blog/script-o-hatrack/ >>>>> * See also https://github.com/LABHR/octohatrack >>>>> * GitHub built this based on Simon's ideas: >>>>> https://octo.github.com/projects/flat-data >>>>> * "A git query language" https://github.com/filhodanuvem/gitql >>>>> * "git quick stats" https://github.com/arzzen/git-quick-stats >>>>> >>>>> I think there's plenty of tooling there to show how to get the info we >>>>> want. >>>>> At a guess it's a couple of evenings exploring, and then pulling it >>>>> into a report. >>>>> >>>>> I think if we were to do something along these lines, starting a new >>>>> tradition, for Django 4.0 in December, that would be really great. >>>>> >>>>> I'm not sure as yet on the exact format to present all that. >>>>> The blog post for the _Final_ versions could say more without too much >>>>> difficulty. >>>>> (e.g. >>>>> https://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2021/apr/06/django-32-released/ >>>>> ) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Kind Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Carlton >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, 29 June 2021 at 21:35:16 UTC+2 smi...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>> >>>>>> I've had this sat in my drafts for a while. Rather than let it sit on >>>>>> the shelf any longer I thought it better to share. >>>>>> >>>>>> I've been thinking about recognising contributions recently. The main >>>>>> issue with the notes here is that it focuses on code rather than >>>>>> contributions to the wider Django ecosystem. However, if there are >>>>>> improvements that we could make here I think we should explore those, >>>>>> and >>>>>> maybe some of them could be used more widely. >>>>>> >>>>>> Here are a few ideas of how contributions could be recognise >>>>>> following a peer review of other projects. Some are better than others, >>>>>> some are easier to implement than others. Hopefully something to prompt >>>>>> some discussion. What do folk think? How would you feel if you were >>>>>> recognised in one of these ways? >>>>>> >>>>>> - Add Python style `contributed by` in the release notes. I'm not so >>>>>> sure about adding the ticket number (in fact I think I saw Nick Pope >>>>>> point >>>>>> to something today that says we don't ref tickets?). [1] >>>>>> >>>>>> - For the headline features add names to the blog post [2]. Could >>>>>> also add link to their blog / website /Twitter (less sure about this >>>>>> second >>>>>> part). >>>>>> >>>>>> - The blog post (or another page) to include a long list of names of >>>>>> everyone who contributeted a commit in that release. I think it's fine >>>>>> if >>>>>> this is long, can probably use Simon W's GitHub-to-sqlite repo for this >>>>>> so >>>>>> it is sustainable. [3] >>>>>> >>>>>> - For the headline features make a series of Twitter posts >>>>>> highlighting them and acknowledge contributors. I'm thinking something >>>>>> along the lines of what Adam Johnson did for the 3.2 release but include >>>>>> names & thank yous. >>>>>> >>>>>> - A rust style thanks page [4] (but **not** the all time list, I >>>>>> don't think that's helpful and it's on GitHub anyway). >>>>>> >>>>>> - A go style contributor summit. (I don't think this is feasible, >>>>>> even remotely. But I'll put it out there!). A slight variation on this >>>>>> could be folk who have contributed could apply for different coloured >>>>>> conference passes/lanyards. [5] >>>>>> >>>>>> Kind Regards >>>>>> >>>>>> David >>>>>> >>>>>> [1]https://docs.python.org/3/whatsnew/3.8.html >>>>>> [2] >>>>>> https://www.djangoproject.com/weblog/2021/apr/06/django-32-released/ >>>>>> [3]https://github.com/dogsheep/github-to-sqlite >>>>>> [4]https://thanks.rust-lang.org/ >>>>>> [5]https://blog.golang.org/contributors-summit-2019 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>>> Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. >>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>>> an email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. >>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/0174cb33-44e3-48f4-80dc-27b8f9fb8cb4n%40googlegroups.com >>>>> >>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/0174cb33-44e3-48f4-80dc-27b8f9fb8cb4n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>>> Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>>> an email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAFNZOJNob_gXZAVWHBoW2MF18%2B8sxEJQYMCuXZj8%2BBB_910U8w%40mail.gmail.com >>>> >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAFNZOJNob_gXZAVWHBoW2MF18%2B8sxEJQYMCuXZj8%2BBB_910U8w%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>>> . >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. >>> >> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAMyDDM0Zh60Bz9qkr9mEMOcP67wxYxXQ7d7g0t0n%3DPPR6ay4YQ%40mail.gmail.com >>> >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAMyDDM0Zh60Bz9qkr9mEMOcP67wxYxXQ7d7g0t0n%3DPPR6ay4YQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. > > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/3eb98e48-d08e-4364-bc02-bc6b987d3cdan%40googlegroups.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/3eb98e48-d08e-4364-bc02-bc6b987d3cdan%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/d8069f8b-367e-46fa-be9a-e70f5d2f5342n%40googlegroups.com.
