Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Sep 2, 2021. It is now read-only.

Add check release workflow on CI and CHANGELOG.md #72

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jul 16, 2021

Conversation

jtpio
Copy link
Member

@jtpio jtpio commented Jul 15, 2021

In preparation for adopting (or at least testing) the Jupyter Releaser: #53

  • Add Changelog
  • Add check release workflow
  • Switch to yarn to simplify the setup
  • Use the same version everywhere

@jtpio
Copy link
Member Author

jtpio commented Jul 15, 2021

Added two new labels used by github-activity: https://github-activity.readthedocs.io/en/latest/#splitting-prs-by-tags-and-prefixes

image

@jtpio
Copy link
Member Author

jtpio commented Jul 15, 2021

As a follow-up, we can then test a Draft Changelog workflow: https://github.com/jupyter-server/jupyter_releaser#typical-workflow

@jtpio
Copy link
Member Author

jtpio commented Jul 15, 2021

#49 was suggesting switching to either yarn or jlpm, and #50 went for jlpm.

Here we change back to yarn to not introduce a new tool (plain yarn is enough) and make the use of the releaser simpler.

@jtpio jtpio marked this pull request as ready for review July 15, 2021 14:57
@jtpio
Copy link
Member Author

jtpio commented Jul 15, 2021

cc @mbektas @fcollonval what do you think about adopting the releaser?

We could then try to go through the typical workflow and cut a new release:

  • draft changelog for 3.0.11-3
  • draft release
  • publish release

Detailed in https://github.com/jupyter-server/jupyter_releaser#typical-workflow

If that works we can then update RELEASE.md with the new instructions.

It it fails somewhere during the process we can always manually publish the new version.

Copy link
Member

@blink1073 blink1073 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice!

@fcollonval
Copy link
Member

what do you think about adopting the releaser?

I'm not against using it. But I'm convinced galata helpers should integrate the core repo as soon as possible.

@jtpio
Copy link
Member Author

jtpio commented Jul 16, 2021

But I'm convinced galata helpers should integrate the core repo as soon as possible.

For reference this is discussed in this issue: jupyterlab/jupyterlab#10480

I also think it would be better to move galata there, not sure when that would happen though.

@jtpio
Copy link
Member Author

jtpio commented Jul 16, 2021

Let's give it a try and see how it goes.

@jtpio jtpio merged commit 7500160 into jupyterlab:main Jul 16, 2021
@jtpio jtpio deleted the releaser branch July 16, 2021 09:36
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants