New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat(version): add --changelog-skip-unstable option #3882
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should not have duplicate prerelease headers in the generated markdown. Changes in prereleases should be aggregated together with the changes from the major release. See comment in lerna-publish-conventional-fixed-prerelease.spec.ts
.
# 2.0.0-alpha.0 (YYYY-MM-DD) | ||
|
||
|
||
### Features | ||
|
||
* **package-1:** Add foo ([SHA](COMMIT_URL)) | ||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
||
# [2.0.0-alpha.0](/compare/v1.0.0...v2.0.0-alpha.0) (YYYY-MM-DD) | ||
|
||
|
||
### Features | ||
|
||
* **package-1:** Add foo ([SHA](COMMIT_URL)) | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
2.0.0-alpha.0 appears twice in this markdown file. This shouldn't happen, as users looking at version 2.0.0 won't care which specific prerelease version the feature was added in. Instead, we should get the changes from all the prereleases aggregated together with the changes from 2.0.0 itself, so it would look like this:
# [2.0.0](/compare/v1.0.0...v2.0.0) (YYYY-MM-DD)
### Features
* **package-1:** Add baz ([SHA](COMMIT_URL))
* **package-1:** Add foo ([SHA](COMMIT_URL))
# [2.0.0-alpha.0](/compare/v1.0.0...v2.0.0-alpha.0) (YYYY-MM-DD)
### Features
* **package-1:** Add foo ([SHA](COMMIT_URL))
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@fahslaj I do agree that this is the expected markup.
conventional-changelog/conventional-changelog#675 suggests this is an issue with conventional-changelog
. However, tests in this PR with independent versioning seem to be correct and the prerelease changes are properly aggregated see here. Any suggestions ?
@Juveniel do you have plans to carry this forward please? |
Hey @JamesHenry, In order to continue with this PR, I need to first fix the issue in In general, I would love for this feature to be pushed forward, as it really is a pain to not be able to aggregate changes from pre-release versions in the actual graduated version. I am even considering switching to |
Description
Adds
--changelog-skip-unstable
option that allows to include changelogs from prereleases when publishing a stable release.Motivation and Context
fixes: #3392, #3119, #2248
How Has This Been Tested?
Added unit and integration tests.
Types of changes
Checklist: