I recently noticed that the documentation created after
x.y release (even 1 day after) never reflected at
In discussion here I was educated by hsbt (Hiroshi SHIBATA) that the source of
docs.ruby-lang.org/<x.y>.0/ is actually a branch
ruby_<x_y>, so in order to appear at docs.ruby-lang.org, documentation should be "backported" into the proper branch, which usually does not happen.
A few examples (documentation submitted by me, but it is not that I consider "my" documentation the most important, it is just easier for me to track):
doc/syntax/pattern_matching.rdoc: merged on 2020-02-23, but is not represented here: https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/2.7.0/ -- because it isn't present in ruby_2_7 branch.
doc/syntax/methods.rdoc(add endless methods and
...-forwarding): merged 2020-12-25 (just a few hours after 3.0 release), but not represented here: https://docs.ruby-lang.org/en/3.0.0/doc/syntax/methods_rdoc.html -- because it isn't in ruby_3_0 branch.
IMPORTANT: It is just two random examples, I believe there are numerous problems like that.
I wonder how this should be addressed:
- should somebody gather all the occurrences to "commits that should be picked into the proper branches"?
- can it be done in some systematic manner?
- can at least currently developed (3.0's) enhancements be "backported" in some automatic manner (PR labels?..)
Updated by mame (Yusuke Endoh) about 2 months ago
- Status changed from Open to Closed
I've asked usa (Usaku NAKAMURA), one of the branch maintainers. He said "If you want a change to be backported, please create a backport ticket with a master commit or a patch. I will review them and determine whether each of them should be backported or not."
Updated by zverok (Victor Shepelev) about 2 months ago
You should create the backport ticket on redmine (this site) as "Bug" tracker and "Closed" status, with "REQUIRED" backport status.
Unfortunately, I don't have enough rights to use statuses other than
Open, neither to fill the