Reconsider usage of the changelog action
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Rust
- Stars
- 830
- Forks
- 108
- Avg merge
- 6d 33m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 2
Description
I ran into a couple issues with the GitHub action that requires a changelog entry:
- Right after a release, the "Unreleased" section gets removed, resulting in an inevitable merge conflict between every PR that re-adds the "Unreleased" section with their own change.
- Third-party contributions in the changelog seem to link a PR number by convention, which requires you to either look through both the issues and PRs pages to intuit what the next PR number will be, or create the PR, let it fail, then amend the commit with your assigned PR number.
These seem like annoying hurdles for third-party contributions.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
The issue names no file, test, or entry point. Start by locating the GitHub action that requires changelog entries and the release workflow, then inspect how the Unreleased section and PR-number links are handled. Done means an agreed approach that removes these hurdles for third-party contributions.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- github-actions
- Domain
- ci-cd, release
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100