Changelog for v1.15.0-rc1

[6543]

as title

[techknowlogick]

a few nits, also each line should start with a capital letter unless it otherwise makes sense.

[fnetX]

Just a side note: What about including a quick Heads Up section what people would need to "adjust" in order to install / maintain / use the software. IMHO the "BREAKING" section is rather targeted on people who follow the development of Gitea and acts as a reminder what has been changed in this release / RC.
But for normal users, I suppose this isn't really an understandable thing. Just one example, Codeberg might not have been the only installation to place the robots.txt into the public folder to get it served (instead of the CustomPath as told in the docs), and some admin might not catch to move the robots.txt file. I know this is implicitly mentioned when serving assets from another folder, but still, I think reading your changelog doesn't always make it obvious how the change will affect you (as user, admin, ...).

Thank you for considering this.

[zeripath]

Just a side note: What about including a quick Heads Up section what people would need to "adjust" in order to install / maintain / use the software. IMHO the "BREAKING" section is rather targeted on people who follow the development of Gitea and acts as a reminder what has been changed in this release / RC.

We put a BREAKING section in our blog posts:

https://blog.gitea.io/2021/04/gitea-1.14.0-is-released/#breaking-changes-or-potentially-breaking

I'm trying to update and make it easier to explain why a PR is breaking by changing their initial comments e.g.:

#16010 (comment)

So that when it comes to writing the blog post we can copy and paste that information into the blog.

Some of the breaking changes - and I guess you're specifically referencing #15219 here - the breaking nature only becomes apparent through testing and through people trying things.

If you find a PR is breaking - it would be helpful if you could help improve this process by explaining clearly in a comment on the PR how it is breaking so we can update and improve this.

For example - this is the first time I've heard of the robots.txt problem.

[fnetX]

@zeripath thank you for your explanation. I wasn't aware of the blog posts containing more information. I can try to assist in writing these comments if I come along them, otherwise I'll just suggest to keep in mind every information available to end users is helpful to avoid being caught by breaking things you (speaking of end users) didn't fully understand as I don't always find it obvious to get what it's about. Nice to see this is already happening, so take this as a friendly reminder to continue the work 😉

The blog posts + explanations in the PRs are already much more helpful than the changelog in Git, don't know why I missed this ... ✌️

[6543]

@fnetX they are managed in a different repo: https://gitea.com/gitea/blog

[zeripath]

The addition of the

## ⚠️ BREAKING ⚠️ 

marker in pr in the first comment is an innovation I've come up with this cycle - hopefully it's useful and others will start doing it of their own volition.

For any pr I merge or write I try to make the first comment make some sort of sense. I've tried to suggest this to other maintainers/mergers and similarly I'm hoping this will rub off on other mergers & maintainers too.

In terms of making this CHANGELOG.md file more useful - I think it needs to remain quite succinct and as updating it can be difficult I wouldn't want to have more information in it. However I take your point that the blog post can be hard to find. Maybe we need to update the readme to suggest to reading the blog?

BTW are you aware we use a tool to generate the changelog? IIRC it's possible to use that tool to emit the first comment from the PRs too so I guess we could include the instructions on how to do that in the readme?