reiabreu opened a new issue, #9188:
URL: https://github.com/apache/storm/issues/9188
*This issue was drafted with the help of an LLM (Claude).*
**Summary.** `dev-tools/release_notes.py` lists PR titles only, so notes
about breaking or behaviour changes have no place to live until someone writes
the release blog post. I'd like to let PRs carry an "Upgrade notes" section
that the script prints.
**Today**
- `release_notes.py` reads all issues and PRs of a milestone and prints
`[#number] - title`, grouped by the first label. It doesn't use the PR body.
- There is no upgrade guide in `docs/`. In the 3.0.0 and 3.1.0 posts on
storm-site, breaking changes are hand-written (for example the "Clojure support
removed" box in 3.0.0).
- `.github/release.yml` has a "Breaking Changes" category for the labels
`breaking-change` and `major`, but neither label exists in the repo.
- Example: #9168 removes a public config constant and stops Nimbus from
cleaning up `/backpressure` znodes. The author wrote an upgrade note, but only
as a PR comment, so nothing will carry it into the 3.2.0 notes. The same will
happen for #9167 and #9169.
**Proposal**
1. Add an optional heading to `.github/pull_request_template.md`:
```markdown
## Upgrade notes
*(Only for breaking or behaviour changes: what changes for users and what
they must do. Delete this section otherwise.)*
```
2. Create a `breaking-change` label, as `.github/release.yml` already
expects.
3. In `release_notes.py`, add an "Upgrade notes" section to the output. For
each PR in the milestone whose body has that heading, print the PR link and the
text under it. The issues list the script already fetches includes `body`, so
no extra API calls are needed.
**What it gives us.** `RELEASE_NOTES.html` would hold the upgrade notes, and
the releaser copies them into the announcement post instead of searching
comment threads. PRs without the heading are unaffected.
**Open points**
- It depends on authors and reviewers filling in the section.
- The script could warn when a `breaking-change` PR has no section.
- Should the 3.2.0 removals under #8994 be the first users of it?
I can open a PR for the script and the template if this direction is fine.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
