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

Remove support for classic changelog format #137

Closed
felixfontein opened this issue Nov 4, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #168
Closed

Remove support for classic changelog format #137

felixfontein opened this issue Nov 4, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #168
Assignees

Comments

@felixfontein
Copy link
Collaborator

That format is used by Ansible 2.9 (and nothing else to my knowledge). It has been deprecated in 0.21.0 (released on 2023-06-27).

If a new relase of Ansible 2.9 should be done, an older version of antsibull-changelog still supporting that format can be used. IMO there's no need to carry around the extra complexity.

@samccann samccann self-assigned this Jun 3, 2024
@samccann
Copy link
Contributor

samccann commented Jun 6, 2024

@felixfontein - I was poking away at this one and removing all classic support, but then I noticed this in the docs about the changes_format:

Note that support for `classic` is **DEPRECATED** and will be removed in
a future release. The field will from then on be required.

So does that mean we need to keep that parameter around even though it can only ever be combined once classic support is removed? Or can we just get rid of it entirely?

@felixfontein
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@samccann that parameter should stay around for some time, and make the program fail if set to anything else than combined. That ensures that new versions of antsibull-changelog aren't accidentally used with projects using the old format that it no longer supports.

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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants