{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/acrmp/foodcritic/issues/406","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/acrmp/foodcritic/issues/406/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/acrmp/foodcritic/issues/406/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/acrmp/foodcritic/issues/406/events","html_url":"https://github.com/acrmp/foodcritic/pull/406","id":116175799,"number":406,"title":"bump version to 5.1.0","user":{"login":"lamont-granquist","id":454857,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/454857?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/lamont-granquist","html_url":"https://github.com/lamont-granquist","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/lamont-granquist/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/lamont-granquist/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/lamont-granquist/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/lamont-granquist/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/lamont-granquist/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/lamont-granquist/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/lamont-granquist/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/lamont-granquist/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/lamont-granquist/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":9,"created_at":"2015-11-10T18:51:37Z","updated_at":"2015-11-11T10:51:58Z","closed_at":null,"pull_request":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/acrmp/foodcritic/pulls/406","html_url":"https://github.com/acrmp/foodcritic/pull/406","diff_url":"https://github.com/acrmp/foodcritic/pull/406.diff","patch_url":"https://github.com/acrmp/foodcritic/pull/406.patch"},"body":"- Update version to v5.1.0 for release\r\n- Switch CHANGELOG.md to github_changelog_generator and add 'rake changelog' command to update it.\r\n"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/acrmp/foodcritic/issues/comments/155735217","html_url":"https://github.com/acrmp/foodcritic/pull/406#issuecomment-155735217","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/acrmp/foodcritic/issues/406","id":155735217,"user":{"login":"stevendanna","id":852371,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/852371?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevendanna","html_url":"https://github.com/stevendanna","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevendanna/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevendanna/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevendanna/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevendanna/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevendanna/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevendanna/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevendanna/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevendanna/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/stevendanna/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2015-11-11T10:51:58Z","updated_at":"2015-11-11T10:51:58Z","body":"TL;DR: The goal is to get consensus around a single process for consistently putting together releases. :+1: with a caveat: I'd prefer to not edit change log entries for past releases if possible. \r\n\r\nIt is hard for me look at the *Unreleased* section of the new change log and not feel like we've lost something. The human-made change log has consistent wording for similar features, has better feature descriptions, and can be consumed without clicking many PR links. Similarly, the chef-zero change @randomcamel mentions is more nicely formatted than a raw git log, but isn't much more clear to a normal user reading it. Compare those to the change log for a substantially more complex project: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/blob/master/NEWS\r\n\r\nThis was going to be true of any automated tool. To get a human-readable change log that provides more value than a nicely formatted git log requires human effort at some point in the process, either at the time of writing commit/PR messages or at the time of constructing the change log, or both.\r\n\r\nThat said, right now a major stumbling block we have is the manual work that goes into releasing various projects and the idiosyncratic nature of each process.  Our overall goal is to arrive at a common release process.  As the author of a competing internal tool that has seen almost no adoption, I can confidently say that getting everyone using the tool/process is more important than it having the output we want *right now*.  We can improve the output over time. We can do manual edits to the generated changelog if we feel it is too unclear.  We can replace it with a different tool that slots into the same release process. However, all of these improvements are only effective once we are consistently using a similar process across a number of our projects.\r\n\r\nYes, the automated output is worse right now.  But the goal is to get better about releases across a broad set of our projects and this helps in that direction."}}