openmw.org

Thanks. But really not necessary.

Zini wrote: ↑17 May 2018, 12:29 Not really an issue. Now my time is very limited these days, but updating the change log once every could of month I still can handle without problems.

What about all the work I have to spend re-writing every entry as soon as the changelog is ready? It's hours of tedious, frustrating work, and if we could spread it out over time that would be really great...

If it's a dev doing it instead of a user it might be harder to understand. There's also the issue of different writing styles making things inconsistent. At the least, you'd have to review all the entries to ensure they make sense and don't sound like they were written by fifty different people.

I'm still happy to rewrite every entry, just would be nice to spread it out over time instead of all in a rush at the end. And if I could get immediate feedback while the issue is fresh on the dev's mind, that would be even better.

raevol wrote: ↑19 May 2018, 05:19 I'm still happy to rewrite every entry, just would be nice to spread it out over time instead of all in a rush at the end. And if I could get immediate feedback while the issue is fresh on the dev's mind, that would be even better.

This was the intention of this initiative. To prevent the rush and amount of work needed at the end, to help make the release process as painless as possible. Have a dev write one little line per PR is asking very very little.

@raevol: Wasn't aware that this is so much additional work for you.

Problem is, if we let individual developers write their changelog entries these entries are probably not in a presentable state suitable for the end user. Coder's mindset vs end user's mindset and all. These entries would be end-user documentation and most coders are notoriously bad at writing that.

But ultimately this is what we are already doing. The developer/reporter is putting up an issue description in the issue title (can developers update/change issue titles? not sure), which I then use for the changelog (with some cleanup). Can we make developers write descriptions that do not need an additional pass? Kinda sceptical about that.

Well, if they write unintelligible gibberish in the changelog, we can make sure it's corrected on its own ahead of releases. Come release time Raevol doesn't have to crunch. We're just spreading the time spent over the entire development cycle instead of a few days before release.

Also might benefit the video making, maybe making it possible to get a few clips done early instead of doing a huge script and changelog run through.

Metasploit is doing it upon merge, instead of requiring the author to do it.

ap0 wrote: ↑19 May 2018, 18:06 Metasploit is doing it upon merge, instead of requiring the author to do it.

The author is the one who makes the pull request (merge).

Zini wrote: ↑19 May 2018, 12:26 Problem is, if we let individual developers write their changelog entries these entries are probably not in a presentable state suitable for the end user. Coder's mindset vs end user's mindset and all. These entries would be end-user documentation and most coders are notoriously bad at writing that.

But I think the idea is to still have me write the entry, but just to trigger writing it when the merge is merged, instead of when the release is called for. Sorry if I am missing the discussion, but I think that is the relevant bit here.