-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
Add guidelines for maintaining changelogs #121
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
965b082
to
34c5980
Compare
Changelogs seem straightforward enough to maintain, but recent updates in the `core` repo indicate that there may be misconceptions. The guidelines in this PR aim to clarify the purpose of a changelog and how to maintain them so that they are valuable for consumers at all times. This is a prequisite for updating the release process in the `core` monorepo but should prove valuable in many other MetaMask projects as well.
34c5980
to
c70d08a
Compare
This pull request sets up GitHub code scanning for this repository. Once the scans have completed and the checks have passed, the analysis results for this pull request branch will appear on this overview. Once you merge this pull request, the 'Security' tab will show more code scanning analysis results (for example, for the default branch). Depending on your configuration and choice of analysis tool, future pull requests will be annotated with code scanning analysis results. For more information about GitHub code scanning, check out the documentation. |
## tl;dr | ||
|
||
- Every MetaMask project for which new versions are distributed publicly should have a changelog file, and it should be called `CHANGELOG.md`. | ||
- A changelog should be written primarily for consumers of the project, and as such, it should be valuable to them at all times. |
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.
Perhaps worth reminding people that even if no one else uses the package now, someone may want to in the future? i.e. even if a team that produces a package are their own consumers, it's worth thinking about other teams.
This could include: | ||
|
||
- Changing the behavior of a public function or method ✅ | ||
- Adding or removing a "production" or peer dependency ✅ |
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.
Maybe make it more obvious that adding a peer dependency is breaking since that happens quite frequently.
Not sure why lint is failing on the mobile e2e doc. We must not have the settings correct on this repo and are allowing branches to be merged with lint violations. |
Changelogs seem straightforward enough to maintain, but recent updates in the
core
repo indicate that there may be misconceptions around them. The guidelines in this PR aim to clarify the purpose of a changelog and how to maintain them so that they are valuable for consumers at all times.This is a prequisite for updating the release process in the
core
monorepo but should prove valuable in many other MetaMask projects as well.📖 View rendered document
Closes #122.