💅📝 Restructure the changelog for clarity

[webknjaz]

This synchronizes the changelog setup from some other aio-libs projects.

Specifically, the new Towncrier fragment types are set up to be
bugfix, feature, deprecation, breaking, doc, packaging,
contrib, misc.

Previously, the misc fragments were rendered without the entry
context, just as a list of PR numbers. With this change, the change
note text is displayed as usual.

This also implements support for commits as change note references.
They are rendered separately. When there are several change note
fragment files symlinked, with numbers and commit hashes pointing to
the same changelog category, all of them are enumerated. PRs/issue
numbers a listed in a paragraph that is separate from the commit
links.

Are there changes in behavior for the user?

The changelog will be nicer.

Related issue number

N/A

Checklist

• I think the code is well written
• Unit tests for the changes exist
• Documentation reflects the changes
• If you provide code modification, please add yourself to CONTRIBUTORS.txt
  • The format is <Name> <Surname>.
  • Please keep alphabetical order, the file is sorted by names.
• Add a new news fragment into the CHANGES/ folder

  • name it <issue_or_pr_num>.<type>.rst (e.g. 588.bugfix.rst)

  • if you don't have an issue number, change it to the pull request
    number after creating the PR

    • .bugfix: A bug fix for something the maintainers deemed an
      improper undesired behavior that got corrected to match
      pre-agreed expectations.
    • .feature: A new behavior, public APIs. That sort of stuff.
    • .deprecation: A declaration of future API removals and breaking
      changes in behavior.
    • .breaking: When something public is removed in a breaking way.
      Could be deprecated in an earlier release.
    • .doc: Notable updates to the documentation structure or build
      process.
    • .packaging: Notes for downstreams about unobvious side effects
      and tooling. Changes in the test invocation considerations and
      runtime assumptions.
    • .contrib: Stuff that affects the contributor experience. e.g.
      Running tests, building the docs, setting up the development
      environment.
    • .misc: Changes that are hard to assign to any of the above
      categories.

  • Make sure to use full sentences with correct case and punctuation,
    for example:

    Fixed issue with non-ascii contents in doctest text files
    -- by :user:`contributor-gh-handle`.

    Use the past tense or the present tense a non-imperative mood,
    referring to what's changed compared to the last released version
    of this project.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (a379e63) 97.48% compared to head (a2a4a92) 97.48%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #8066   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   97.48%   97.48%           
=======================================
  Files         107      107           
  Lines       32600    32600           
  Branches     3800     3800           
=======================================
  Hits        31781    31781           
  Misses        616      616           
  Partials      203      203           

Flag	Coverage Δ
CI-GHA	97.40% <ø> (ø)
OS-Linux	97.07% <ø> (ø)
OS-Windows	95.57% <ø> (ø)
OS-macOS	96.71% <ø> (-0.19%)	⬇️
Py-3.10.11	95.50% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.10.13	96.88% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.11.7	96.53% <ø> (-0.03%)	⬇️
Py-3.12.1	96.66% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.8.10	95.47% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.8.18	96.81% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.9.13	95.47% <ø> (ø)
Py-3.9.18	96.84% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
Py-pypy7.3.15	96.40% <ø> (ø)
VM-macos	96.71% <ø> (-0.19%)	⬇️
VM-ubuntu	97.07% <ø> (ø)
VM-windows	95.57% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[patchback]

Backport to 3.9: 💔 cherry-picking failed — conflicts found

❌ Failed to cleanly apply cba3469 on top of patchback/backports/3.9/cba346995b953b23421079ee0bccdfe85d736e7a/pr-8066

Backporting merged PR #8066 into master

1. Ensure you have a local repo clone of your fork. Unless you cloned it
   from the upstream, this would be your origin remote.
2. Make sure you have an upstream repo added as a remote too. In these
   instructions you'll refer to it by the name upstream. If you don't
   have it, here's how you can add it:

   $ git remote add upstream https://github.com/aio-libs/aiohttp.git

3. Ensure you have the latest copy of upstream and prepare a branch
   that will hold the backported code:

   $ git fetch upstream
   $ git checkout -b patchback/backports/3.9/cba346995b953b23421079ee0bccdfe85d736e7a/pr-8066 upstream/3.9

4. Now, cherry-pick PR 💅📝 Restructure the changelog for clarity #8066 contents into that branch:

   $ git cherry-pick -x cba346995b953b23421079ee0bccdfe85d736e7a

   If it'll yell at you with something like fatal: Commit cba346995b953b23421079ee0bccdfe85d736e7a is a merge but no -m option was given., add -m 1 as follows instead:

   $ git cherry-pick -m1 -x cba346995b953b23421079ee0bccdfe85d736e7a

5. At this point, you'll probably encounter some merge conflicts. You must
   resolve them in to preserve the patch from PR 💅📝 Restructure the changelog for clarity #8066 as close to the
   original as possible.
6. Push this branch to your fork on GitHub:

   $ git push origin patchback/backports/3.9/cba346995b953b23421079ee0bccdfe85d736e7a/pr-8066

7. Create a PR, ensure that the CI is green. If it's not — update it so that
   the tests and any other checks pass. This is it!
   Now relax and wait for the maintainers to process your pull request
   when they have some cycles to do reviews. Don't worry — they'll tell you if
   any improvements are necessary when the time comes!

🤖 @patchback
I'm built with octomachinery and
my source is open — https://github.com/sanitizers/patchback-github-app.

[patchback]

Backport to 3.10: 💔 cherry-picking failed — conflicts found

❌ Failed to cleanly apply cba3469 on top of patchback/backports/3.10/cba346995b953b23421079ee0bccdfe85d736e7a/pr-8066

Backporting merged PR #8066 into master

1. Ensure you have a local repo clone of your fork. Unless you cloned it
   from the upstream, this would be your origin remote.
2. Make sure you have an upstream repo added as a remote too. In these
   instructions you'll refer to it by the name upstream. If you don't
   have it, here's how you can add it:

   $ git remote add upstream https://github.com/aio-libs/aiohttp.git

3. Ensure you have the latest copy of upstream and prepare a branch
   that will hold the backported code:

   $ git fetch upstream
   $ git checkout -b patchback/backports/3.10/cba346995b953b23421079ee0bccdfe85d736e7a/pr-8066 upstream/3.10

4. Now, cherry-pick PR 💅📝 Restructure the changelog for clarity #8066 contents into that branch:

   $ git cherry-pick -x cba346995b953b23421079ee0bccdfe85d736e7a

   If it'll yell at you with something like fatal: Commit cba346995b953b23421079ee0bccdfe85d736e7a is a merge but no -m option was given., add -m 1 as follows instead:

   $ git cherry-pick -m1 -x cba346995b953b23421079ee0bccdfe85d736e7a

5. At this point, you'll probably encounter some merge conflicts. You must
   resolve them in to preserve the patch from PR 💅📝 Restructure the changelog for clarity #8066 as close to the
   original as possible.
6. Push this branch to your fork on GitHub:

   $ git push origin patchback/backports/3.10/cba346995b953b23421079ee0bccdfe85d736e7a/pr-8066

7. Create a PR, ensure that the CI is green. If it's not — update it so that
   the tests and any other checks pass. This is it!
   Now relax and wait for the maintainers to process your pull request
   when they have some cycles to do reviews. Don't worry — they'll tell you if
   any improvements are necessary when the time comes!

🤖 @patchback
I'm built with octomachinery and
my source is open — https://github.com/sanitizers/patchback-github-app.

[webknjaz]

Manual backports:

• 3.10: [PR #8066/cba34699 backport][3.10] 💅📝 Restructure the changelog for clarity #8067
• 3.9: [PR #8066/cba34699 backport][3.9] 💅📝 Restructure the changelog for clarity #8068

[webknjaz]

@Dreamsorcerer with this update, we should be able to change the misc fragments to more accurate types. Also, there's another activity I started doing in other projects — checking the changelog draft and mass-correcting the writing style inconsistencies. Like, making the sentences complete, switching them to the past tense (or a present tense-based alternative referring to the changes since the previous release in a non-imperative mood; e.g. using phrasing like "X now does Y" etc). This helps make the resulting released change log section more coherent. Would you mind looking into this?