Skip to content
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

Split RELEASES.md into new "2021 edition" file #118280

Closed

Conversation

PoignardAzur
Copy link
Contributor

@PoignardAzur PoignardAzur commented Nov 25, 2023

Split RELEASES.md into new RELEASES_2021_EDITION.md file

To ensure that splitting the file didn't break formatting, I ran the
following commands:

pulldown-cmark <RELEASES_2021_EDITION.md >rendered_2021.html
pulldown-cmark <RELEASES.md >rendered.html
diff rendered.html rendered_2021.html | rg "^>"

At first the diff included multiple new lines in rendered_2021.html,
indicating links that weren't rendered to HTML because their target was
missing. After I added those targets, but diff was remove-only.

The general policy for RELEASES files would be to update the _2021
file until edition 2024 comes, then we'd create a RELEASES_2021_EDITION
file (also linked from the RELEASES.md file), and so on.

We could optionally add a RELEASES_2018_EDITION and/or a RELEASES_OLD
file. Whether we should do that is outside the scope of this PR
(and I'd appreciate if we could avoid bikeshedding it here).

@rustbot
Copy link
Collaborator

rustbot commented Nov 25, 2023

r? @Mark-Simulacrum

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Nov 25, 2023
@rustbot rustbot added the T-release Relevant to the release subteam, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Nov 25, 2023
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@PoignardAzur
Copy link
Contributor Author

The following files have no copyright and licensing information:
*  ../RELEASES_2021_EDITION.md

Uh. I guess there's some ignore file I should add this to?

@PoignardAzur
Copy link
Contributor Author

PoignardAzur commented Nov 25, 2023

Apparently the reuse tool is mad at me because RELEASES_2021_EDITION.md doesn't have a license header... but RELEASES.md doesn't have one either and it's fine?

It could be that RELEASE.md is in an ignore list, either hardcoded in reuse or somewhere in the repo; but either way I haven't found it.

Anybody know what's going on?

To ensure that splitting the file didn't break formatting, I ran the
following commands:

```sh
pulldown-cmark <RELEASES_2021_EDITION.md >rendered_2021.html
pulldown-cmark <RELEASES.md >rendered.html
diff rendered.html rendered_2021.html | rg "^>"
```

At first the diff included multiple new lines in `rendered_2021.html`,
indicating links that weren't rendered to HTML because their target was
missing. After I added those targets, but diff was remove-only.

The general policy for RELEASES files would be to update the _2021
file until edition 2024 comes, then we'd create a RELEASES_2021_EDITION
file (also linked from the RELEASES.md file), and so on.

We could optionally add a RELEASES_2018_EDITION and/or a RELEASES_OLD
file, but that decision is outside the scope of this commit.
@rustbot rustbot added the A-meta Area: Issues & PRs about the rust-lang/rust repository itself label Dec 5, 2023
@PoignardAzur
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've added RELEASES_2021_EDITION.md to the .reuse/dep5 file. Should be good now.

@rust-log-analyzer
Copy link
Collaborator

The job x86_64-gnu-llvm-16 failed! Check out the build log: (web) (plain)

Click to see the possible cause of the failure (guessed by this bot)
GITHUB_ACTION=__run_7
GITHUB_ACTIONS=true
GITHUB_ACTION_REF=
GITHUB_ACTION_REPOSITORY=
GITHUB_ACTOR=PoignardAzur
GITHUB_API_URL=https://api.github.com
GITHUB_BASE_REF=master
GITHUB_ENV=/home/runner/work/_temp/_runner_file_commands/set_env_af5fbf07-1bda-48cf-8308-96af3b61046c
GITHUB_EVENT_NAME=pull_request
---
GITHUB_SERVER_URL=https://github.com
GITHUB_SHA=061639fb253562e7f1902683352d36e09d617700
GITHUB_STATE=/home/runner/work/_temp/_runner_file_commands/save_state_af5fbf07-1bda-48cf-8308-96af3b61046c
GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY=/home/runner/work/_temp/_runner_file_commands/step_summary_af5fbf07-1bda-48cf-8308-96af3b61046c
GITHUB_TRIGGERING_ACTOR=PoignardAzur
GITHUB_WORKFLOW_REF=rust-lang/rust/.github/workflows/ci.yml@refs/pull/118280/merge
GITHUB_WORKFLOW_SHA=061639fb253562e7f1902683352d36e09d617700
GITHUB_WORKSPACE=/home/runner/work/rust/rust
GOROOT_1_19_X64=/opt/hostedtoolcache/go/1.19.13/x64
---
##[group]Building stage0 tool linkchecker (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
    Finished release [optimized] target(s) in 0.11s
##[endgroup]
##[group]Testing stage0 Linkcheck (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
releases.html:33: broken link - `RELEASES_2021_EDITION.md`
number of HTML files scanned: 34855
number of HTML redirects found: 10552
number of links checked: 3013203
number of links ignored due to external: 65341

@PoignardAzur
Copy link
Contributor Author

PoignardAzur commented Dec 5, 2023

Not sure how to fix this error. I could change the link to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/RELEASES_2021_EDITION.md, but that path doesn't exist yet.

I could remove the link altogether until the PR is merged, then add it back in a following PR.

@Mark-Simulacrum
Copy link
Member

I'm going to close this for now -- the current planned solution is rendering the release notes ourselves (via #117888). That is already merged & working, and once it hits stable we'll probably update our automation to link to that instead of the GitHub rendered view for future releases.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-meta Area: Issues & PRs about the rust-lang/rust repository itself S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-release Relevant to the release subteam, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants