You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I suggest making the target audience explicit in the website.
Also, it would be good if the website addresses the concern about the differences between the NEWS (or release notes ) with ChangeLog.
Personally, I see that ChangeLog is to document
the visible features affected
the (may or may not be visible) improvements such as code refactoring
the why of the changes (optional)
for end-users of the software.
This does mean that ChangeLog becomes very close to the definition of release notes. Yes. So be it.
How does that differ from git commits and automating the changelog from git commits? as suggested by #64
I would also suggest making explicit that git commits are largely for developers internally.
They represent the change in the state of the code aka the what or the how.
It is optional and nice to include the why inside git commits but the target audience is developers and the main gist should be about the code changes.
Therefore, automating changelog from git commits is not a top priority. Nor necessarily ideal. Of course, this is an opinionated choice.
This discussion was converted from issue #273 on March 07, 2023 04:37.
Heading
Bold
Italic
Quote
Code
Link
Numbered list
Unordered list
Task list
Attach files
Mention
Reference
Menu
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
-
I saw in the podcast https://changelog.com/podcast/127#transcript-17 that changelog is meant for the end users (I think?) but it's not explicit.
I suggest making the target audience explicit in the website.
Also, it would be good if the website addresses the concern about the differences between the NEWS (or release notes ) with ChangeLog.
Personally, I see that ChangeLog is to document
for end-users of the software.
This does mean that ChangeLog becomes very close to the definition of release notes. Yes. So be it.
How does that differ from git commits and automating the changelog from git commits? as suggested by #64
I would also suggest making explicit that git commits are largely for developers internally.
They represent the change in the state of the code aka the what or the how.
It is optional and nice to include the why inside git commits but the target audience is developers and the main gist should be about the code changes.
Therefore, automating changelog from git commits is not a top priority. Nor necessarily ideal. Of course, this is an opinionated choice.
Let me know your thoughts.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions