kolibri-design-system
kolibri-design-system copied to clipboard
learningequality
Updating changelogs.yml/ workflows to make it more robust.
Description
Their is an attempt to make the check changelog workflow more robust so it checks that every field of changelog item exist and they are different from their default values. Please refer PR #816
Issue addressed
Closes #760
Addresses #*PR# 885
Before/after screenshots
Changelog
- Description: Updating changelog workflows to check for every field.
- Products impact: updated API
- Addresses: #760
- Components: no
- Breaking: no
- Impacts a11y: no
- Guidance: Here is an attempt to make the changelog section more robust .Earlier only the "description" field was mandatory ,but this PR ensures that all the fields of the changelog item exist and anything unnecessary is ignored.
Steps to test
)check for every field of changelog item. 2)they are different from default values 3)they are properly rendered in the PR description.
(optional) Implementation notes
At a high level, how did you implement this?
Does this introduce any tech-debt items?
Testing checklist
- [ ] Contributor has fully tested the PR manually
- [ ] If there are any front-end changes, before/after screenshots are included
- [ ] Critical and brittle code paths are covered by unit tests
- [ ] The change is described in the changelog section above
Reviewer guidance
- [ ] Is the code clean and well-commented?
- [ ] Are there tests for this change?
- [ ] Are all UI components LTR and RTL compliant (if applicable)?
- [ ] Add other things to check for here
Comments
Please refer PR #816 , for previous comments and reviews by @rtibbles and other reviewers.
Hi! I just a minor question/feature request which I came across while working on a different PR:
The changelog.yml currently states that we should be creating multiple changelog items for each change:
https://github.com/learningequality/kolibri-design-system/blob/e4449d25512c065573b2ea231ca8925f98a660cd/.github/pull_request_template.md?plain=1#L18-L20
I just want to confirm if the current version of this script supports this functionality? If not, what might be a good way to support it: adding the changes and architecting the template of pull requests for the same in this PR itself or opening a new issue?
