Replies: 5 comments 1 reply
-
|
I agree with this one!! 👏🏽 👏🏽 Although this would mean diverging from a standard (our format comes from https://keepachangelog.com/), I think that we should be migrating to a better separation of the different modules and this is a nice step in that direction. For instance, there are cases where installations are only using a couple of modules (like |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
After some months without seeing this proposal, I like it even more 😄 This is also how Rails orders its releases notes: https://edgeguides.rubyonrails.org/7_0_release_notes.html |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Moving this to a discussion so it gets more visibility |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I just discovered this discussion, and totally agree that this would improve changelog readability a lot, also for for non-developers! 😁 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
When generating the changelog using #7461, we get the list of PRs sorted by type of change:
But it's a bit difficult to find what changes affect a given module. The current output follows this structure:
We could reorganize the output to group the PRs by type of change and module:
Notice how the reference to
#1234is duplicated because it affects two different modules.It's more verbose than the curren version, but I think this would help on the readability of the changelog.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions