Skip to content

Update changelog#4667

Merged
aaruni96 merged 5 commits intomasterfrom
update-changelog
Feb 28, 2025
Merged

Update changelog#4667
aaruni96 merged 5 commits intomasterfrom
update-changelog

Conversation

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Automated changes by create-pull-request GitHub action

Comment thread CHANGELOG.md Outdated
Comment thread CHANGELOG.md Outdated

### Changes related to Groups

- [#4659](https://github.com/oscar-system/Oscar.jl/pull/4659) Implement `transitivity` and `rank_action` for $G$-sets
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@lgoettgens lgoettgens Feb 27, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This won't be in 1.3.0 unless it gets backported, so maybe the script uses master instead of the release-1.3 branch?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Indeed. This is because I am currently running this script from the branch behind this PR, which also targets master...

Ideally we would have completed this PR 1-2 weeks ago and merged it before branching, but that ship is sailed...

So now we should get this merged ASAP and also backported ASAP, then run the script from release-1.3 ... and hope the magic @aaruni96 implemented on my behest knows how to handle that case 😅 . Otherwise we'll have to run it manually with the appropriate arguments.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actually the script may not be able to deal with this even in GAP, now that I think about it: there usually the branching and release of the x.y.0 release are done on the same time and nothing else is merged in between, so there is no need to handle this.

To handle this I think we need two dates:

  1. the date the previous release branch (here: release-1.2) was created
  2. the date the current release branch (here: release-1.3) was created

Then we want all PRs merged between the two dates, but without backport-1.2 label; and all PRs after the second date but with backport-1.3 label.

Does that sound about right?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wouldn't it be easier to get the PR numbers from all the commit messages in-between? This would handle everything and you don't have to check for backport labels

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

perhaps but then we need a completely different implementation, and e.g. need to fetch the entire history in the GH workflow. Also it is easy to mess up a merge to remove the PR number...

Though of course what I describe is only for the x.y.0 release.

For x.y.(n+1) release, we want to compare to the previous x.y.n release. I am not sure if the backport PRs contain the necessary information? But we can get the release dates for both tags via gh easily and query for all PRs merged in between and with the "backport-x.y" label

@lgoettgens
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

lgoettgens commented Feb 27, 2025

For reading the changelog, I would find it way more intuitive if the pr numbers in each section increase instead of decrease. In the current setting it could happen that I first read how some function got changed, and a few lines down I read that it got introduced. This somehow feels to be the wrong way around

Comment thread CHANGELOG.md Outdated
Comment thread CHANGELOG.md Outdated
@lgoettgens
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I am missing a lot of PRs from the November/December period. Does the script handle PRs that were merged to master after the 1.2 branch off, that were not backported? My example I was looking for is #4339

@fingolfin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I am missing a lot of PRs from the November/December period. Does the script handle PRs that were merged to master after the 1.2 branch off, that were not backported? My example I was looking for is #4339

Great catch! My original script supported this, but apparently this was lost at some point.

Indeed, I see this in the script log:

Base tag is v1.2.2
v1.2.2
Base tag was created  2024-12-13

So it only takes things "after v1.2.2" into account (i.e. the date of that release). But that's not correct.

There is an important ingredient missing from the release process compared to what we have in GAP and what the script expects (CC @aaruni96 @benlorenz): when branching off a new release branch, say release-1.3, in GAP we also add a (signed) tag v1.4dev to the first commit on master after the branch point (i.e. usually the commit changing Project.toml to list 1.4.0-DEV as version). Then this tag (resp. its date) is used as reference point.

An alternative is to just use git merge-base release-1.2 master of course.

(We use the v1.4dev tag in GAP also for the version shown in the banner, e.g. GAP 4.15dev-84-g4c8bd9f-dirty indicates 84 commits since the 4.14 release branched off).

@fingolfin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

A much simpler option for now (that GAP used in the past) is to just manually look up the value and hard code it -- that's the quickest way to get this working and we can look into a proper fix after the release is out.

(I've also added a v1.4dev signed tag for experiments)

@fingolfin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I added the date hack and now #4339 is there

Comment thread CHANGELOG.md Outdated
Comment thread CHANGELOG.md Outdated
@lgoettgens lgoettgens added release notes: not needed PRs introducing changes that are wholly irrelevant to the release notes backport 1.3.x backport for release branch 1.3 labels Feb 28, 2025
Comment thread CHANGELOG.md Outdated
Comment thread CHANGELOG.md Outdated
Comment thread CHANGELOG.md Outdated
Comment thread CHANGELOG.md
Comment thread CHANGELOG.md Outdated
@aaruni96 aaruni96 mentioned this pull request Feb 28, 2025
11 tasks
Comment thread CHANGELOG.md Outdated
aaruni96 and others added 4 commits February 28, 2025 15:40
Co-authored-by: Max Horn <max@quendi.de>
Co-authored-by: Max Horn <max@quendi.de>
Co-authored-by: Lars Göttgens <lars.goettgens@rwth-aachen.de>
Co-authored-by: Lars Göttgens <lars.goettgens@rwth-aachen.de>
Co-authored-by: Lars Göttgens <lars.goettgens@rwth-aachen.de>
@aaruni96 aaruni96 merged commit 3dc236f into master Feb 28, 2025
@aaruni96 aaruni96 deleted the update-changelog branch February 28, 2025 14:52
aaruni96 added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 28, 2025
* Update changelog on 2025-02-28

Co-authored-by: changelog[bot] <changelog[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Aaruni Kaushik <aaruni96@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Max Horn <max@quendi.de>
Co-authored-by: Lars Göttgens <lars.goettgens@rwth-aachen.de>
(cherry picked from commit 3dc236f)
Signed-off-by: Aaruni Kaushik <aaruni@edufor.me>
aaruni96 added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 28, 2025
Backports for 1.3.0 : 

Add DOI of the book #4654
Add attribute for more detailed info on tunable sections #4636
Move book tests to github runners #4629
Update Nemo to 0.49 #4645
fix a NiceMonomorphism for GAP constructed in Oscar #4640
Polyhedral: fix hash for halfspace and related types #4600
Cleanup some code related to dim(I) == -inf checks #4571
Fix bug in G4-flux computation of big model #4647
Add more missing hash functions #4638
Document how changelog maintenance works #4579
Update changelog #4667
@aaruni96 aaruni96 removed the backport 1.3.x backport for release branch 1.3 label Mar 7, 2025
fieker pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2025
* Update changelog on 2025-02-28


Co-authored-by: changelog[bot] <changelog[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Aaruni Kaushik <aaruni96@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Max Horn <max@quendi.de>
Co-authored-by: Lars Göttgens <lars.goettgens@rwth-aachen.de>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

release notes: not needed PRs introducing changes that are wholly irrelevant to the release notes

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants