Changelog

Everything about development and the OpenMW source code.
User avatar
Zini
Posts: 5349
Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 15:16

Re: Changelog

Post by Zini » 20 May 2018, 11:58

You would basically like to have the same procedure as we have it now, but get notified whenever a new issue is solved (that requires an entry to the changelog), so you can keep writing the more verbose release version of the changelog item per item during development instead of all at once at release? Am I understanding you correctly?

If that would improve the way you work we can look into that, though I would still prefer finding solutions based on the current procedure (which works very well IMO) instead of switching over to an alternative one.

User avatar
raevol
Posts: 2664
Joined: 07 Aug 2011, 01:12
Location: Caldera

Re: Changelog

Post by raevol » 20 May 2018, 21:47

Zini wrote:
20 May 2018, 11:58
You would basically like to have the same procedure as we have it now, but get notified whenever a new issue is solved (that requires an entry to the changelog), so you can keep writing the more verbose release version of the changelog item per item during development instead of all at once at release? Am I understanding you correctly?
I believe so.
Zini wrote:
20 May 2018, 11:58
If that would improve the way you work we can look into that, though I would still prefer finding solutions based on the current procedure (which works very well IMO) instead of switching over to an alternative one.
It seems like it would improve things for me: I am open to whatever we'd like. It would be nice to spread the workload out over time, but if this is the *only* change and it ends up being logistically not worth it, I'm fine keeping the old process too. Maybe @psi29a could outline a more concrete version of what he envisioned, and that'd give us an idea of just how much of a deviation from our current process it would be?

User avatar
AnyOldName3
Posts: 879
Joined: 26 Nov 2015, 03:25

Re: Changelog

Post by AnyOldName3 » 20 May 2018, 23:22

This thread has confused me. It seems that the main problem is that raevol is writing up the whole changelog right before the release, so has a lot of work to do all at once, but there isn't any technical reason why he can't just have a file on his own computer that's a draft version of the changelog which he updates at his own leisure when PRs get merged and he has time to do things. I might be missing something critical, but it just seems to me like it's raevol suffering from a problem of his own making with a simple raevol-only solution. Is this accurate?
AnyOldName3, Master of Shadows

User avatar
raevol
Posts: 2664
Joined: 07 Aug 2011, 01:12
Location: Caldera

Re: Changelog

Post by raevol » 21 May 2018, 01:04

AnyOldName3 wrote:
20 May 2018, 23:22
This thread has confused me.
Might be helpful to read from the beginning?

User avatar
drummyfish
Posts: 128
Joined: 22 Oct 2017, 10:13
Github profile: https://gitlab.com/drummyfish
Contact:

Re: Changelog

Post by drummyfish » 21 May 2018, 02:53

To me this seems like a good idea. Yes, raevol can do this, but I think it's better to distribute work that can be distributed rather than leave it all to a single person X, because

1. The project is less dependent on person X. Not that I suspect raevol to quit, but he may for example get busy during a release and then everyone has to wait.
2. Person X has more time to do something that cannot be distributed, such as write blog posts, make videos etc.

Some things already work this way, e.g. when I implement a new instruction, I should include it's documentation etc. This would be similar - document adding a feature when you add it. I don't see an issue in different writing styles - it's not a novel - and moreover, someone can still go through the changelog in the repo from time to time and edit it if there are typos etc.

The only downside I can see is that devs and maintainers are not used to this and it'll take them some minimal effort to get used to always checking the changelog has been updated, but that's really a minor thing.

User avatar
AnyOldName3
Posts: 879
Joined: 26 Nov 2015, 03:25

Re: Changelog

Post by AnyOldName3 » 21 May 2018, 03:15

raevol wrote:
21 May 2018, 01:04
AnyOldName3 wrote:
20 May 2018, 23:22
This thread has confused me.
Might be helpful to read from the beginning?
I did as it unfolded and it just gave me the impression that you're happy doing the work as long as it's not all at once, but there's no reason why you have to do it all at once.
AnyOldName3, Master of Shadows

User avatar
Zini
Posts: 5349
Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 15:16

Re: Changelog

Post by Zini » 21 May 2018, 10:13

Looks like we have a lot of different opinions here. I think we should wait for scrawl to comment on this before we make a decision, because he would be one of the people most affected by it.

User avatar
psi29a
Posts: 3887
Joined: 29 Sep 2011, 10:13
Github profile: https://github.com/psi29a/
Contact:

Re: Changelog

Post by psi29a » 21 May 2018, 11:24

Zini wrote:
21 May 2018, 10:13
Looks like we have a lot of different opinions here. I think we should wait for scrawl to comment on this before we make a decision, because he would be one of the people most affected by it.
How would he be most affected? (I get the idea that you think this will a lot more work for devs when it really isn't.)

User avatar
raevol
Posts: 2664
Joined: 07 Aug 2011, 01:12
Location: Caldera

Re: Changelog

Post by raevol » 21 May 2018, 18:43

I had a private converstaion with AnyOldName3 that made me realize that maybe a bit is missing from this discussion:

I'm not really sure what the exact process psi29a is proposing is, which I think is where a lot of the confusion is coming from. It's true that there's no reason I couldn't start working on the changelog as soon as each PR is pushed, but right now our process is for me to wait until Zini sends me his curated changelog for me to rewrite. If I currently started writing my own, there's a chance that Zini and I would be working in parallel, and at the end of the day his is going to be the "definitive" one, so mine might be wasted effort. If we had a process change so that the definitive changelog was written as we go, and was available to me as we go, that is what would open the opportunity for the work being spread out for me. So from my view, my part of this discussion is more of a process change than a technical change.

Another point: I've jumped on the writing aspect of the changelog because that is what is relevant to me, but I think psi29a's original proposition may have encompassed a bit broader of a scope than just what I am involved with. I could be wrong- some clarification would be good.

User avatar
psi29a
Posts: 3887
Joined: 29 Sep 2011, 10:13
Github profile: https://github.com/psi29a/
Contact:

Re: Changelog

Post by psi29a » 21 May 2018, 19:59

I was just suggesting that we keep a running changelog either in md, rst or just txt that is updated per PR by whoever is making the PR of the change they are doing. I would be great if it included both the PR or commit it came in on and the ticket/issue number for our bug tracker if it resolved that ticket/issue.

Example, just the entry under OpenMW-CS, the rest would already be there:
OpenMW 0.44 (UNRELEASED)
OpenMW
New Features:
  • Brought shadows back (PR: #1547) by AnyOldName3
OpenMW-CS
Bug fix:
  • Extension-agnostic texture loading (Resolves bug: 4402 | PR: #1712) by Capostrophic
This is just an example, but as you can see... just one entry per PR. Raevol can edit this up later after the fact to make any lines more readable. It would certainly make the project looks a bit more professional as well. :)

I _really_ don't see why this would prevent or otherwise scare off developers... they are are already pretty good at writing up PRs to begin with.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests