-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29
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: create GitHub releases #311
Conversation
I've tested on this release. |
@uetchy If you want to keep doing it, I will leave some comments here. |
@eunjae-lee I'd like to keep working on this🚀 |
Thanks again @uetchy for your contribution :) |
@eunjae-lee I think shipjs is definitely going to be a crucial part of the distribution ecosystem! Have you put a PR review already? I couldn't see any comment right now. |
@uetchy ahhh I wrote them but they weren't submitted. Can you see them now? |
b20e40b
to
5f67ad8
Compare
@eunjae-lee All done! Could you check out the revised code? |
// fetch CHANGELOG | ||
exportedPath = tempWrite.sync(existingChangelog); | ||
} else { | ||
// generate CHANGELOG |
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.
What do you think of not generating here at all?
For example, at shipjs prepare
, conventional-changelog already generated some changelog for the current version and user didn't like it, so they removed it. And if we generate and use it again for the github release, there's nothing user can do about it.
It might make sense just to keep using what user decided at shipjs prepare
step.
What do you think?
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.
I initially thought it was good to generate CHANGELOG automatically for the release but then realized that it was supposed to be already generated before trigger
. So you are right.
Let this section just extract matching release from CHANGELOG then generate a release on GitHub repository.
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.
How about just create a release with a blank message if there are no CHANGELOG?
If we want to add support for uploading artifacts (zip files, etc) to a release in the future, we then need to create a release even without a changelog.
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.
How about just create a release with a blank message if there are no CHANGELOG?
It totally makes sense 👍
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.
@eunjae-lee 👌👌
I already updated my code to do so
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.
Nice! I'll try out this PR this weekend, and hopefully merge it 🙂
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.
@eunjae-lee Yay! Thank you for taking your weekend time
b2fb7c1
to
3a708f4
Compare
@uetchy While I was testing this, I've found some stuff, so added commits. |
@eunjae-lee Totally reasonable fixes! wonder why I missed ‘fs.resolve’😑 |
That's what the review is for 😁 Congrats for the first code PR at Ship.js merged! 🎉 |
🎉🛳🍾 |
This PR injects
createGitHubRelease
intorelease
.What
createGitHubRelease
doconventional-changelog
hub release create
with changelogPossibly fixes #109