Skip to content

Skip changelog generation when changelog type is none #13216

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 4, 2025

Conversation

wyardley
Copy link
Contributor

@wyardley wyardley commented Feb 27, 2025

Could use some help in terms of doing some functional testing on this and / or suggesting a way I could add some test coverage. But basically, the idea here is to skip generating a changelog entry when the changelog type is none

Mostly, this should prevent adding an extra changelog entry (whether or not any other changes are generated), avoiding creating extra noise in the downstream repos to create a bunch of empty files.

Separately, I could make a PR to clean up the empty changelog files in the tpg / tpg-beta repos if there's interest.

Fixes hashicorp/terraform-provider-google#20134

Release Note Template for Downstream PRs (will be copied)


I made a first pass at some unit tests locally (this file currently has 0 coverage), but a bit stuck on the best way to mock the runner and whether or not to use mock_runner_test.go.

Looking at downstream, I do see that there are a handful of cases where there's a note even though release notes is none, e.g., (in 9889.txt):

```release-note:none
Fixes: b/304402329, b/304432955, b/304432958
```

It would probably be a little harder, but would be possible to retain those if we did want to send them downstream, though I think the changelog is only used for release notes anyway?

Copy link

Hello! I am a robot. Tests will require approval from a repository maintainer to run.

@trodge, a repository maintainer, has been assigned to review your changes. If you have not received review feedback within 2 business days, please leave a comment on this PR asking them to take a look.

You can help make sure that review is quick by doing a self-review and by running impacted tests locally.

@github-actions github-actions bot requested a review from trodge February 27, 2025 17:21
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Mar 4, 2025

@trodge This PR has been waiting for review for 3 weekdays. Please take a look! Use the label disable-review-reminders to disable these notifications.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Mar 6, 2025

@GoogleCloudPlatform/terraform-team @trodge This PR has been waiting for review for 1 week. Please take a look! Use the label disable-review-reminders to disable these notifications.

Copy link

@trodge This PR has been waiting for review for 3 weekdays. Please take a look! Use the label disable-review-reminders to disable these notifications.

Copy link

@GoogleCloudPlatform/terraform-team @trodge This PR has been waiting for review for 1 week. Please take a look! Use the label disable-review-reminders to disable these notifications.

Copy link

@GoogleCloudPlatform/terraform-team @trodge This PR has been waiting for review for 3 weeks. Please take a look! Use the label disable-review-reminders to disable these notifications.

Copy link

github-actions bot commented Apr 3, 2025

@GoogleCloudPlatform/terraform-team @trodge This PR has been waiting for review for 4 weeks. Please take a look! Use the label disable-review-reminders to disable these notifications.

@trodge trodge added this pull request to the merge queue Apr 4, 2025
Merged via the queue into GoogleCloudPlatform:main with commit 378061c Apr 4, 2025
14 of 16 checks passed
@wyardley wyardley deleted the wyardley/issues_20134 branch April 4, 2025 01:06
@wyardley
Copy link
Contributor Author

wyardley commented Apr 4, 2025

Thanks @trodge. were you able to find a way to test? from what I can see, this generated nothing downstream, and hashicorp/terraform-provider-google#22229, which came after mine, did seem to generate one, so hopefully it's working(ish)?

I noticed some PRs have multiple release notes, but I assume it wouldn't be expected to have a "none" type mixed with other / real types? Not sure if there could be some kind of corner case that this would run up against.

Is it worth me making a PR to remove the empty changelog entries as well (directly against tpg / tpg-beta repos)?

Dawid212 pushed a commit to Dawid212/magic-modules that referenced this pull request Apr 9, 2025
pandirigoog pushed a commit to pandirigoog/magic-modules that referenced this pull request Apr 14, 2025
shantstepanian pushed a commit to shantstepanian/magic-modules that referenced this pull request Apr 21, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Downstream changelog generation for empty changelog messages
2 participants