[Qgis-psc] [QGIS-Developer] Documentation bot

[DelazJ]

Hi Denis

Le mar. 7 janv. 2020 à 06:24, Denis Rouzaud <denis.rouzaud at gmail.com> a
écrit :

> Hi Harrissou,
>
> No worries, I have been more focused on technical matters up to now, but I
> was indeed expecting some room for improvements. There was a bit of a
> stress to provide reports for the grant proposal, but it was clearly a call
> for discussion, sorry not to state it clearly.
>
> Merci,

Harrissou (follow-up in Matthias message)

>
> Le mar. 7 janv. 2020 à 02:59, DelazJ <delazj at gmail.com> a écrit :
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Thanks Denis for the work.
>> I might be missing some key points because comparing the generated
>> reports from the two systems, I'm sorry I feel like it's instead a
>> regression. Alow me to explain:
>>
>> 1. For the same feature merged in the code, see old system report [0] vs
>> new system's [1]. From a doc writer perspective, I get more information
>> from the first one than the second.
>>
>
> I see. So following Nyall's suggestion:
> 1. Copy description
> 2. Copy commit message of commits having [needs-doc] (similarly to now)
>
>>
>> 2. Another point is that milestone is what we use to filter issues
>> reports and manage the docs schedule, so if it's not set by the developer
>> (assuming that the dev knows the milestone to indicate), someone has to do
>> it manually in the generated report. With the current system, when we enter
>> a new development cycle, we (Richard and myself) set the new milestone (for
>> LTR) and the target version label [2] and then, every generated report is
>> automatically filled with these information at their creation. Done once
>> and nobody cares about anymore. Until the next release.
>> This new system means devs "should" enter that information for each
>> doc-related PR. I can't count the number of times I made a remind for the
>> [needs-docs] label, and the PR was merged without...
>>
>
> I see.
> So, you take the assumption that any request for documentation happens in
> the current release and not in the past.
> I guess it might make sense and that it would still be possible to handle
> manually the case.
> I will see if I can do some nice grepping of the CMakeLists (or as
> Matthias suggested max(release-x_y)+2 ) to calculate labels and milestone.
>
>>
>> 3. What is meant by "developers should take care of it"? When/where will
>> the details of the feature be available? If the dev wants to write about
>> his changes in our docs, OK. Otherwise, are we not overloading their
>> workload while they could have provided the necessary bits in the commit
>> message, as they should be doing currently.
>> What I understood from the proposal is that developers will be encouraged
>> to detail their feature in the PR message, the place they sell their
>> feature to others, using a simple and accessible language. And then, at the
>> merge time, the message of the PR (with maybe screenshots) will be copied
>> to the generated report in docs, allowing writers to see what the feature
>> is. Did I misunderstand or have the options changed meanwhile?
>>
>
> I will update the message explaining how the bot works and that the PR
> author should document in the description.
> And there, if you have any improvement to make as text changes feel free
> to go ahead.
>
> Denis
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-psc/attachments/20200107/2d38c61d/attachment.html>