use Perl Log In
Changes.yml spec?
I was browsing through the solr-ruby project svn directory when i can across CHANGES.yml (sample below):
- v0.0.5
release_date: 2007-08-??
changes:
- Added support for highlighter fragment size to Solr::Request::Standard
- Added support for MoreLikeThese to Solr::Request::Standard
- Added Solr::Request::ModifyDocument (requires SOLR-139 patch)
- Added Solr::Util.query_parser_escape()
- v0.0.4
release_date: 2007-08-16
changes:
- Solr::Indexer#solr added to gain access to the Solr::Connection instance
- Fixed issue with multi-line String field values when field set multiValued="false"
- Fixed tests to work without either Hpricot or libxml2
This makes total sense -- Machine parsable high-level changelogs. I'd love to see a spec created for this. A quick poll of #perl-qa show that some other folks agree. I searched around but couldn't find any existing specs -- any takers? :)
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.

Bad YAML (Score:1)
should be ended with ':'. But I think this idea only flies for real simple Changelogs. In CPAN, you find a great diversity of different markup people use for distinct things: bug fixes, new feature implementation, doc patches, etc., etc. That's not easy to be captured in a simple format. And if it is not simp
Re: (Score:1)
I've been meaning to write a Changes file parser/modifier for a while, so I can do automated incremental module releases for some modules.
This would make it damned easy.
Re: (Score:1)
Not YAML (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
--rjray
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Good idea! (Score:1)
This is a very good idea, but mostly because a standardised changelog format gives us options like automatic pre-release checks of the file ("Have I updated the Changes.yml file before uploading the package to CPAN?") or making new Kwalitee tests for CPAN-friendly packages. :)
Oh, and the syntax can be "fixed" by adding a ":" after the version number (see v0.0.1 in the example).
Re: (Score:1)
Hmf. Should have properly read the other comments [perl.org] first. :-P
Anyhow, I think that format doesn't look too bad, and I definitely think it may be worth promoting. :)
Here comes spec v0.01... (Score:1)
Oh, and the syntax can be "fixed" by adding a ":" after the version number (see v0.0.1 in the example).
No, fix it right:
And Viola! We have v0.01 of our spec! :-)
I like YAML for its readability due to its lack of sigils (unlike JSON). And for simple YAML there is YAML::Tiny which can handle those basic structures, namely a list of hashes., just fine...
XML, the Anti-YAML (Score:2)
I've been using a home-brewed XML format for some of my changelogs. I also (of course) keep a more traditional-format CL in the distro. I've been working on some XSLT stylesheets and an article about it for XML.com, but lack of tuits has slowed me. This may be the nudge I need to finish it.
Of course, mentioning XML alone may raise cries from those who are tired of seeing it applied to every vaguely-text-data-related problem that comes along. And I understand (and sometimes share) the sentiment. But in this
--rjray
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I'd be very interested to see that overview/article, and perhaps contribute to the effort.
OK, I'll bite... (Score:1)
It's just a quick draft of things that could be handy from my point-of-view as a module maintainer, please add your ideas and positive critiques...