> Am 02.06.2020 um 14:11 schrieb Daniel Ruggeri <dan...@bitnebula.com>: > > On 6/1/2020 6:23 AM, Yann Ylavic wrote: >> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 9:30 PM Ruediger Pluem <rpl...@apache.org> >> wrote: >> >>> Reviewing our backport process I noticed that in many cases a clean merge >>> via svn merge fails due to conflicts in CHANGES. While >>> these are easy to solve it puts IMHO unnecessary extra work on the backport >>> process, both for reviewing and for actually doing the >>> backport. How about if we change the way we document changes the following >>> way: >>> >>> 1. We create a changes-fragments directory (name to be determined) at the >>> top level. >>> 2. For each release we create a subdirectory such that we end up with the >>> following structure: >>> >>> changes-fragments/ >>> 2.4.41/ >>> 2.4.42/ >>> 2.4.43/ >>> 2.4.44/ >>> >>> 3. Each directory contains the changes for each release and each change >>> entry is a single file. >>> 4. We have a script that builds our current CHANGES file from the content >>> in changes-fragments directories with the help of >>> a template or at least some sort of header / footer that is static. >>> 5. This script can be called either manually and we commit the resulting >>> CHANGES file as we like just like the x-forms commits >>> for documentation plus this script is called by the release scripts from >>> Daniel as part of the preparation of rolling a >>> release. >>> >> +1 from me, I don't volonteer for the scripts though :) >> >> Regards; >> Yann. >> > Hi, Yann; > > I'm open to whatever... and don't mind writing or tweaking scripts once we > decide on an approach :-) > > While we are discussing ideas in this neighborhood, one thing to keep in mind > is that during release of security fixes, sometimes there are items added to > CHANGES and sometimes CHANGES is modified to add CVE information. There have > been minor bumps in the road where these patches don't always apply cleanly. > So, if possible, it would be great to consider. There may be nothing to do, > though, since that happens waaaaay after backport. >
+1 from me as well. CHANGES is annoying atm, any automation appreciated. Cheers, Stefan
