Skip to content

Conversation

@jakelandis
Copy link
Contributor

@jakelandis jakelandis commented Oct 22, 2024

This commit prepares the docs for v9.

  • removes all v8 release notes, highlights, and breaking changes
  • update v8 files to v9 as place holders for v9 docs
  • updates references to current (9) and current - 1 (8) where appropriate
  • ran ./gradlew generateReleaseNotes

Note - Some of this content is generated by ./gradlew generateReleaseNotes and is may not be accurate to v9 only. We will need to manually adjust later. For now just trying to get the big change in.

Also, the REST API doc is showing up in the transient setting migration guide ...I added a fixme to fix later. Again, just trying to get the big change in.

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Documentation preview:

@jakelandis jakelandis added the >docs General docs changes label Oct 23, 2024
@jakelandis jakelandis requested review from a team and jmikell821 October 23, 2024 21:54
@jakelandis jakelandis marked this pull request as ready for review October 23, 2024 21:54
@elasticsearchmachine elasticsearchmachine added the Team:Docs Meta label for docs team label Oct 23, 2024
@elasticsearchmachine
Copy link
Collaborator

Pinging @elastic/es-docs (Team:Docs)


endif::[]

// The notable-highlights tag marks entries that
// should be featured in the Stack Installation and Upgrade Guide:
// tag::notable-highlights[]

[discrete]
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

AFAIK these are all 8.x release highlights.

in the migration guide.
//TODO: figure out how to get the link below to work !
//For information about specific breaking changes and the impact of requesting
//compatibility mode. See xref:/docs/reference/migration/migrate_9_0/rest-api-changes.asciidoc[REST API changes] in the migration guide.
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jmikell821 - can you help me figure out how to make this reference work ?

@mark-vieira
Copy link
Contributor

mark-vieira commented Oct 23, 2024

Note - I think we will end up fighting with some of the automation for changes targeting both 8.x and 9.0.

I think we've updated things so we don't forward port 8.x release notes to main (9.0). @brianseeders can you confirm/deny this?

in the migration guide.
//TODO: figure out how to get the link below to work !
//For information about specific breaking changes and the impact of requesting
//compatibility mode. See xref:/docs/reference/migration/migrate_9_0/rest-api-changes.asciidoc[REST API changes] in the migration guide.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
//compatibility mode. See xref:/docs/reference/migration/migrate_9_0/rest-api-changes.asciidoc[REST API changes] in the migration guide.
//compatibility mode. See <<rest-api-changes,REST API changes>> in the migration guide.

driving by here :)

Copy link
Contributor Author

@jakelandis jakelandis Oct 24, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks Liam, I tried that but got:

INFO:build_docs:asciidoctor: WARNING: invalid reference: rest-api-changes

The link is trying :
docs/reference/rest-api/rest-api-compatibility.asciidoc <- from here
docs/reference/migration/migrate_9_0/rest-api-changes.asciidoc <- to here

I only updated the file name and anchor name to be 9 instead of 8. This used to work : <<breaking_80_rest_api_changes, REST API changes>>

This also, does not work: See <<breaking_90_rest_api_changes,REST API changes>>

INFO:build_docs:asciidoctor: WARNING: invalid reference: breaking_90_rest_api_changes

So I assume that maybe I removed some implicit transitive include or something like that (I am pretty clueless with asciidoc)

@jakelandis
Copy link
Contributor Author

jakelandis commented Oct 24, 2024

Note - I think we will end up fighting with some of the automation for changes targeting both 8.x and 9.0.

Since the process is to start with main and then backport, the automation will create the change logs in main. I'm not sure exactly how those are used to create the release notes, but it will likely require some manual effort to determine if those apply to 9.0.0 only or not. For example, since yesterday the following change logs have been created. There is at least 1 in there that is 9.0.0 only (as determined by the "type: breaking " label).

I will take another look at the recent change logs removed here and preserve them (before i merge this PR) if they have "type: breaking", but it will be very difficult time consuming without automation support to know based on the information in the change log if it is a 9.0.0 only or not change.

EDIT: on second thought, there is no need to remove the change logs now, so I will leave them alone (reverted the removal)

This reverts commit 0cd8cb2.
@jakelandis jakelandis marked this pull request as draft October 24, 2024 20:32
@jakelandis
Copy link
Contributor Author

pull back to draft since I just realized this competes with #114154 that does the same thing (but slightly better).

@jakelandis
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this as dupcliate of #114154

@jakelandis jakelandis closed this Oct 25, 2024
@jakelandis
Copy link
Contributor Author

re-opening since #114154 was closed

@jakelandis jakelandis reopened this Oct 30, 2024
@jakelandis jakelandis marked this pull request as ready for review October 30, 2024 23:14
@jakelandis
Copy link
Contributor Author

@leemthompo - could you please review. the docs don't need to be perfect for now, but we need a place to start collecting the information.

Copy link
Contributor

@leemthompo leemthompo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Couple questions, happy to approve if need unblocking to move forward, just re-ping :)

@@ -0,0 +1,314 @@
[[migrating-9.0]]
== Migrating to 9.0
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jakelandis there's a lot of stuff in here that's already in 8.x, is that going to be more or less confusing to clean up now versus in a follow-up?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@jakelandis jakelandis Oct 31, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We will end fighting abit with the automation. So even if i clean this up now, it will just come back the next time someone generates the release notes. I think we will need to fix this is in the automation, or just go manual, or something in-between. I would prefer to address in a follow up since the changes here are intended to mechanical. I will add a comment to this file (and others) something to the effect that this is generated.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I updated this PR with a comment for these generated file that links to an internal issue for us to follow up with. I also commented out the content created by the automation. While no one is probably looking at the v9 release notes (it's not released yet) it is better to have no information than wrong information.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💯

Comment on lines 1 to 2
[chapter]
[[release-highlights]]
= What's new in {minor-version}
== What's new in {minor-version}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I presume the removal of [chapter] and the deepening of sub-headings was created by automation?

We recently changed the IA of the left-nav and we don't want to lose these.

tl;dr we need the chapter id and the headings here should start at H2

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yeah, this was created by automation. If if fix it now, it will come back the next time some generates the release notes. I will add a comment to this effect to this file too and will address in a follow up.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thanks!

@@ -1,3 +1,6 @@
// THIS IS A GENERATED FILE. DO NOT EDIT DIRECTLY.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

❤️

@jakelandis jakelandis merged commit aaf7a3e into elastic:main Oct 31, 2024
5 checks passed
jfreden pushed a commit to jfreden/elasticsearch that referenced this pull request Nov 4, 2024
This commit prepares the documentation for version 9. 

Some of the automation generates docs that are not correct for version 9. 
The content has been commented out with a reference to an internal issue 
for us to address before this documentation is used.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

>docs General docs changes Team:Docs Meta label for docs team v9.0.0

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants