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

Rule to validate that the bumped version has been added to CHANGELOG.md #16

Open
micahhahn opened this issue Sep 2, 2022 · 3 comments

Comments

@micahhahn
Copy link

micahhahn commented Sep 2, 2022

What the rule should do:

Check the CHANGELOG.md file for an entry corresponding to the current version specified in elm.json.

What problems does it solve:

Rather similar to UpToDateReadmeLinks this rule could help package authors catch missing information they meant to add to CHANGELOG.md between running elm bump and elm publish.

We could also consider requiring conformance of CHANGELOG.md to keepachangelog.com as part of this rule. For example we could enforce the following format for entries:

## [0.3.0] - 2015-12-03

When (not) to enable this rule:

If you do not want to maintain a CHANGELOG.md and want consumers of your library to guess what has changed between versions.

I am looking for:

Mostly documenting an idea I had and trying to open a discussion around if it is a good one.

I may find the time to work on this in the near future, but if someone else wants to tackle it go for it!

@jfmengels
Copy link
Owner

Hey @micahhahn

This is an interesting idea. This is unfortunately not yet possible because elm-review doesn't give you access to the CHANGELOG. That said, there is a proposal to make this possible, so please pitch in if you want to see this made possible 😊

@micahhahn
Copy link
Author

Ah interesting, I had assumed we would be able to just because we can touch README without really digging into the code.

@jfmengels
Copy link
Owner

READMEs are a pretty important part of an Elm package, hence why support was added for it. Had I been actively maintaining changelogs more at the time I could have added support for it. Now I think the other proposal makes a lot of sense.

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

No branches or pull requests

2 participants