Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Unify and fix CHANGELOG format (or discuss why they should be not) #3

Open
carpawell opened this issue Aug 4, 2023 · 3 comments
Open
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement Improving existing functionality I2 Regular impact S1 Highly significant U4 Nothing urgent

Comments

@carpawell
Copy link
Member

carpawell commented Aug 4, 2023

"NEOFS" part has its own format (node, gates), neo-go has a different one. I think none of them is bad but they are just different.

A new one CHANGELOG was born recently -- SDK. I think it is more like "NEOFS" thing, not a neo-go one but CHANGELOG adopted the neo-go way.

IMO, the same format allows having a better contributing/user experience. But if neo-go has its own and somebody has gotten used to it let it be like that. "NEOFS" repos use a well-known format (a little bit extended).

NOTE: the more that issue is being ignored, the harder its solution applies to SDK (I do not think changing the format is a good thing, let it be done once at the beginning step).

I think any issue solution should be documented in that repo.

@carpawell carpawell added documentation Improvements or additions to documentation question Further information is requested labels Aug 4, 2023
@roman-khimov
Copy link
Member

  1. Changing old logs makes zero sense
  2. Unification can be discussed
  3. "a little bit extended" --- yeah, that's the problem, you can't really refer to this format since it's not compliant

@carpawell
Copy link
Member Author

carpawell commented Aug 4, 2023

  1. Don't mind.
  2. I am not a warrior who wants all to be the same. Just SDK sounds more like neofs not neo-go to me.
  3. Well, we only added Updated for deps and Updating from sections as I remember.

you can't really refer to this format since it's not compliant

Can I if we describe our format here?

@roman-khimov
Copy link
Member

Can I if we describe our format here?

Sure.

@roman-khimov roman-khimov added U4 Nothing urgent S1 Highly significant I2 Regular impact enhancement Improving existing functionality and removed question Further information is requested labels Dec 19, 2023
roman-khimov added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 1, 2024
Not going into a lot of details yet, leaving #3 for the future.

Signed-off-by: Roman Khimov <[email protected]>
roman-khimov added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 1, 2024
Not going into a lot of details yet, leaving #3 for the future.

Signed-off-by: Roman Khimov <[email protected]>
roman-khimov added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 2, 2024
Not going into a lot of details yet, leaving #3 for the future.

Signed-off-by: Roman Khimov <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation enhancement Improving existing functionality I2 Regular impact S1 Highly significant U4 Nothing urgent
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants