First I agree with Jonathan that we should perform some changes with the original PR descriptions.
Then, classifying these PRs is also necessary, otherwise the release notes would be meaningless. There are a lot of PRs that should be classfied in Misc part of https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12425 <https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12425> and I also gave some comments in the PR. IMO, it’s okay to ignore the PRs that only fix some typos or fix some flaky tests. But I found many PRs in Misc part should also be noted. We should not sacrifice the release quality for a new release like 2.9.1. > 2021年12月2日 下午7:11，Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> 写道： > > Hello community, > > There is an open discussion on the Pulsar 2.9.0 release notes PR: > https://github.com/apache/pulsar/pull/12425 > > I have created the block of release notes by downloading the list of PR > using some GitHub API. > Then I have manually classified: > - News and Noteworthy: cool things in the Release > - Breaking Changes: things you MUST know when you upgrade > - Java Client, C++ Client, Python Client, Functions/Pulsar IO > > The goal is to provide useful information for people who want to upgrade > Pulsar. > > My problems are: > - PR titles are often badly written, but I don't want to fix all of them > (typos, tenses of verbs, formatting) > - There are more than 300 PRs, I don't want to classify them manually, I > just highlighted the most important from my point of view > > If for 2.9.0 we still keep a list of PR, then I believe that the current > status of the patch is good. > > If we want to do it another way, then I am now asking if there is someone > who can volunteer in fixing and classifying the list of 300 PRs, it is a > huge task. > > There is already much more work to do to get 2.9.0 completely released (and > also PulsarAdapters) and we have to cut 2.9.1 as soon as possible due to a > bad regression found in 2.9.0. > > Thanks > Enrico
