-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 39
chore: Add Copilot instructions and prompts for changelog and release flow #117
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
chore: Add Copilot instructions and prompts for changelog and release flow #117
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Pull Request Overview
This PR adds documentation and tooling to standardize the release process and changelog management for the Dynatrace MCP Server project. The changes focus on establishing clear guidelines for release preparation and changelog writing to ensure consistency across future releases.
Key changes:
- Added comprehensive changelog style and content guidelines with user-focused writing patterns
- Introduced step-by-step release preparation instructions for maintainers
- Fixed test robustness by using regex matching for User-Agent headers to handle platform variations
Reviewed Changes
Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 1 comment.
File | Description |
---|---|
.github/instructions/changelog.instructions.md |
Comprehensive guidelines for changelog formatting, content, and writing patterns |
.github/prompts/release.prompt.md |
Step-by-step release preparation workflow for maintainers |
src/authentication/dynatrace-clients.test.ts |
Updated User-Agent header tests to use flexible regex matching for cross-platform compatibility |
Do you have a recommendation where I should note how to use this? README? |
Additional Q: should I let Copilot rewrite the old changelog entries? We don't need to keep the re-written version, but it's probably a good check to see how Copilot would (re-)write it in the future. |
I'm 50:50 on whether or not to do that... I don't see much benefit, but I also don't see a risk of doing it... |
maybe a section |
18b0fa3
to
92e949f
Compare
To clarify, I wanted to run this to show how the Copilot-generated rewrites would look like. I have no strong opinion for applying it retroactively. We can do it, or we leave it as it is. Coming to think of it, I don't need to "demo" this with a throwaway changelog file. I can just attach it here 😅 Example (ran prompt with Claude Sonnet 4): @dynatrace-oss/dynatrace-mcp-serverUnreleased Changes
0.5.0 (Release Candidate 3)
0.5.0 (Release Candidate 2)
0.5.0 (Release Candidate 1)
0.4.0
0.3.0
0.2.0
0.1.4
0.1.3
0.1.2
0.1.1
0.1.0
|
92e949f
to
fa45cbf
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
Example changelog looks nice, your instructions also look good - so let's take it |
Neat, thank you! As far as I am concerned, prompt files and instructions are living documents anyhow. We can (and should) revise them as we go. I'll refrain from including the rephrased changelog in this PR though. Edit: somebody else will have to merge this though, I am not authorized. |
fa45cbf
to
05dfb85
Compare
39dad54
into
dynatrace-oss:main
This pull request introduces new documentation and improves test robustness for release and changelog processes, as well as for the Dynatrace client authentication logic. The main changes are grouped into documentation enhancements and test improvements.
Documentation enhancements:
.github/instructions/changelog.instructions.md
to provide clear style and content guidelines for changelog entries, ensuring consistency and user-focused release notes..github/prompts/release.prompt.md
with step-by-step instructions for preparing a release, including changelog management and versioning best practices.Test improvements:
src/authentication/dynatrace-clients.test.ts
to use a flexible regular expression for matching theUser-Agent
header, making tests more robust to platform variations. [1] [2]The change in the unrelated test was required to allow me to commit this in my Windows-based environment.