Prepare 0.15.0#1091
Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1091 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 94.38% 93.87% -0.52%
==========================================
Files 48 51 +3
Lines 6665 6631 -34
==========================================
- Hits 6291 6225 -66
- Misses 374 406 +32 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Per:
git log $(git describe --abbrev=0).. --reverse --oneline \
| cut -d' ' -f1 \
| xargs -I {} gh pr list --search {} --state merged --json number \
| jq '.[] | .number' \
| sort -nu
We've merged 26 PRs since v0.14, of which 14 are currently mentioned in the changelog:
- #1009
- #1011
- #1017
- #1021
- #1027
- #1029
- #1033
- #1038
- #1042
- #1043
- #1044
- #1046
- #1049
- #1053
- #1059
- #1062
- #1063
- #1064
- #1072
- #1073
- #1076
- #1077
- #1082
- #1085
- #1086
- #1094
We don't need to mention all of these (e.g., typo fixes and minor internal changes unlikely to cause breakage), and there's a few items currently in the changelog that I think could be elided, but a few unmentioned PRs stand out to me as warranting mention:
| - Improve documentation for `multizip` (#1053) | ||
| - Implement `PeekingNext` for more types (#1073) | ||
| - Improve documentation | ||
| - Fix `PadUsing::next_back` (#1065) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| - Fix `PadUsing::next_back` (#1065) | |
| - Fix `PadUsing::next_back` (#1082) |
|
|
||
| ### Notable Internal Changes | ||
| - Make `into_group_map` code more idiomatic (#1027) | ||
| - Fix clippy lints (#1076) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| - Fix clippy lints (#1076) | |
| - Fix lints (#1017, #1029, #1076) |
| ### Breaking | ||
| - Improve `Position` (#1042, #1043) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you move the 'Breaking' section before 'Changed'?
| - Introduce `[circular_]array_windows`, deprecate `tuple_windows` (#1086) | ||
|
|
||
| ### Breaking | ||
| - Improve `Position` (#1042, #1043) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| - Improve `Position` (#1042, #1043) | |
| - Restructure `Position` as struct instead of enum (#1042, #1043) |
| - Make `izip!` temporary friendly (#1021) | ||
| - Add `array_combinations_with_replacement` (#1033) | ||
| - Implement `Debug` for remaining public types (#1038) | ||
| - Improve `ExactlyOneError` (#1046, #1049) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| - Improve `ExactlyOneError` (#1046, #1049) | |
| - Specialize `ExactlyOneError::count` (#1046) |
| - Improve `ExactlyOneError` (#1046, #1049) | ||
| - Improve documentation for `multizip` (#1053) | ||
| - Implement `PeekingNext` for more types (#1073) | ||
| - Improve documentation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Generally speaking, I don't think we should bother including documentation improvements in the changelog, unless the change is semantic, e.g., guaranteeing that a function never panics. In those cases, the bullet point should be quite specific about the new guarantee provided.
The role of the changelog is mostly for answering the question "my code broke when I updated, what might be the culprit".
|
@jswrenn I hope I got all of them. Nice command line btw - maybe we should add it to the repo for next time?
I always leaned towards including also minor PRs (to give the authors credit), but I'm fine with restricting it. |
Co-authored-by: xtqqczze <45661989+xtqqczze@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: xtqqczze <45661989+xtqqczze@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: xtqqczze <45661989+xtqqczze@users.noreply.github.com>
5707384
|
@jswren Please let me know if there's anything left I should/can do for 0.15. |
3 participants
As agreed upon in #1085 (comment).
I adapted things from a015a68 (the 0.14.0 one).
I concur, it's a bit of work to create the CHANGELOG.