-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 260
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
A Release Process #4097
A Release Process #4097
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4097 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 84.70% 84.69% -0.02%
==========================================
Files 269 269
Lines 28821 28821
==========================================
- Hits 24412 24409 -3
- Misses 4409 4412 +3 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sweet, thanks for doing this. I'd really like to keep the scope at least for PR titles, and to keep something about those PR titles in the contribution guide, other than that, this looks great and I'm excited to start using it. Thanks a bunch for doing this 🫶
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Removing my Markdown Defender hat
Excellent patch, thanks! I'm excited to use this!
2d683db
to
ea043c1
Compare
Co-authored-by: Ivan Enderlin <[email protected]>
ea043c1
to
ff2323c
Compare
Changelog: Added the `Ed25519PublicKey::to_base64()` method which can be used to | ||
stringify the Ed25519 public key. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is it correct/deliberate that this is written in the past tense ("[I have] added the method") rather than the more conventional imperative ("Add the method")? It looks jarring to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Feel free to open a PR to tweak the wording in that case.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ok thanks, just wanted to confirm it wasn't deliberate.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This PR introduces a cargo-release based release process. The changelogs are handled by git-cliff which
cargo-release
calls as a pre-release hook. An xtask was created to make the commands a bit more intuitive and the whole process a bit less manual.This release process heavily aligns with what we have in vodozemac.
As a special bonus, a
cargo release weekly-report
was added which should help us when we need to write TWIM entries.This would solve almost all the problems we have listed in #3742.