Unify and fix `CHANGELOG` format (or discuss why they should be not)
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- No language data
- Stars
- 2
- Forks
- 1
- Avg merge
- 1h 47m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 3
Description
"NEOFS" part has its own format (node, gates), neo-go has a different one. I think none of them is bad but they are just different.
A new one CHANGELOG was born recently -- SDK. I think it is more like "NEOFS" thing, not a neo-go one but CHANGELOG adopted the neo-go way.
IMO, the same format allows having a better contributing/user experience. But if neo-go has its own and somebody has gotten used to it let it be like that. "NEOFS" repos use a well-known format (a little bit extended).
NOTE: the more that issue is being ignored, the harder its solution applies to SDK (I do not think changing the format is a good thing, let it be done once at the beginning step).
I think any issue solution should be documented in that repo.
Contributor guide
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
Compare the linked CHANGELOG.md files in the NEOFS repositories, neo-go, and the SDK with the Keep a Changelog format. First resolve whether the repositories should share one format or retain separate conventions. Document the decision in the relevant repository or repositories, including how the SDK’s existing format should be handled.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100