Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 27, 2023. It is now read-only.

Add a release 0.30 blog post #2

Merged

Conversation

tcharding
Copy link
Member

@tcharding tcharding commented Feb 24, 2023

Mergeable now I believe. Then run ./build.sh --deploy from master branch after release of bitcoin 0.30.0

Link to github rendering of the markdown: https://github.com/tcharding/www.rust-bitcoin.org/blob/02-24-release-0.30-blog-post/site/content/blog/release-0.30.0.md

In preparation for the 0.30 release write up a upgrade guide as a blog post to help users with the upcoming release.

note

We do not have a github action to deploy yet. While working on this PR I pushed changes to build.sh on master to inhibit deploying unless on master branch.

- We have a workspace now! The main crate now lives in `bitcoin/`. The `bitcoin_hashes` repository
has been merged into the `rust-bitcoin` repository and now lives under `hashes/`. There is a new
`hex` crate so you don't need to depend on `hashes` for hex stuff anymore. There is an `internals`
crate meant for internal use.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is an internal change and thus not very interesting for consumers. We can mention internal changes if you like but I'd prefer to put them at the end.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I removed it all together.

@tcharding
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks @Kixunil, I'll work in your suggestions.

@tcharding tcharding force-pushed the 02-24-release-0.30-blog-post branch from 8f131c2 to c69e3e8 Compare February 27, 2023 00:30
@tcharding tcharding force-pushed the 02-24-release-0.30-blog-post branch from c69e3e8 to ddbfc8f Compare February 27, 2023 22:26
@tcharding
Copy link
Member Author

Force push is fix to ecdsa typo only, no other changes.

@tcharding tcharding force-pushed the 02-24-release-0.30-blog-post branch from ddbfc8f to ba23be1 Compare March 6, 2023 23:08
@tcharding
Copy link
Member Author

Found a typo their/there and also we have secp 0.26 instead of secp 0.27

@Kixunil
Copy link
Contributor

Kixunil commented Mar 7, 2023

@tcharding that version was correct, since hashes break API and secp256k1 publicly depends on it we have to bump the major version (that's also why we had to patch).

@tcharding
Copy link
Member Author

tcharding commented Mar 7, 2023

It was 0.26, I changed it to 0.27 in preparation for the upcoming release, for the reasons you say.

Copy link
Contributor

@Kixunil Kixunil left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Needs a few updates. Also I guess this should no longer be a draft since the release is coming soon.

@tcharding tcharding force-pushed the 02-24-release-0.30-blog-post branch from ba23be1 to acfe477 Compare March 17, 2023 04:24
@tcharding tcharding marked this pull request as ready for review March 17, 2023 04:25
- `CompactTarget`
- `Work`

We added a `U256` type but did not expose it since it is not a general purpose integer type. Rather
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It was already present, we've hid it behind Work and Target. That's why I suggested it in the section below.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

oh my bad, I wondered why you wrote Uint256, I had totally forgotten that it used to be called that.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we should just drop this sentence now, since we mention Uint256 below. We probably don't need to say that it was renamed, since it's private anyway.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This sentence is still present.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for flagging the comment, I had indeed missed it.

The Uint256 type was public before this release so I rekon its worth a mention. Will remove if you feel strongly about it though. Maybe I'm biased because I did the work re-writing that type :)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We already mention it below, though.

Copy link
Member Author

@tcharding tcharding Mar 21, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh I was looking at the bottom lines referring to it, my bad, will remove the top one. Thanks for you patience.

@@ -0,0 +1,174 @@
---
title: "Release 0.30.0 is out!"
date: 2023-02-24T09:50:29+11:00
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I guess the date should be set to when we release?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good point, used a TODO placeholder - this makes hugo fail to build the site so we cannot forget.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

To be explicit, PR now includes a date and i'm updating it ever day so this is mergable (and deployable) without me being available (timezones).

@tcharding tcharding force-pushed the 02-24-release-0.30-blog-post branch from acfe477 to 538bde1 Compare March 19, 2023 01:05
@tcharding
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks for the careful review @Kixunil!

Copy link
Contributor

@Kixunil Kixunil left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ACK 538bde1

Modulo the date. I didn't perform any grammar checks.

@tcharding tcharding force-pushed the 02-24-release-0.30-blog-post branch from 538bde1 to 4f3bfba Compare March 19, 2023 21:37
@tcharding
Copy link
Member Author

Changes in force push:

  • I noticed we had the locktime module wrong, the new locktime types were relative not absolute
  • I added a "Renames" section to list types renamed and a comment to "Suggested steps" pointing to renames section.

@tcharding tcharding force-pushed the 02-24-release-0.30-blog-post branch from 4f3bfba to 36348c9 Compare March 20, 2023 06:58
@tcharding
Copy link
Member Author

Changes in force push:

  • Set date to Mon 20 March
  • Add links to various types when mentioned in the "Suggested steps" section

To create the links I looked at what current URLs on docsrs are and hypothesized what the links would be once we release. Perhaps someone could glance at them and see I've not been brain dead but otherwise I think its ok to merge this PR as is now. Then we need to run ./build.sh --deploy on the master branch to build and publish the site (I just did a test run after merging @Kixunil's PR and I think it works, may need to check status and push manually, I got a bit confused by the output of build.sh running git commands). Do you want to run that right before you publish the 0.30 release @apoelstra?

@apoelstra
Copy link
Member

Left a couple nits on 36348c9. I think we're good to go but since we've got a few hours (at least) I think we should fix them.

@tcharding
Copy link
Member Author

Left a couple nits on 36348c9

Just the one nit, right? Or did some comments get lost?

@tcharding tcharding force-pushed the 02-24-release-0.30-blog-post branch 2 times, most recently from f98a4dc to 754fe2a Compare March 20, 2023 21:31
@tcharding
Copy link
Member Author

Fixed sentence as suggested and updated date to todays date: 21st

@tcharding tcharding force-pushed the 02-24-release-0.30-blog-post branch from 754fe2a to 3e8c775 Compare March 21, 2023 21:13
@tcharding
Copy link
Member Author

Date is now set to the 22.

In preparation for the 0.30 release write up a upgrade guide as a blog
post to help users with the upcoming release.

Please note, includes comments on as-yet-unmerged PRs (*cough* hex).
@tcharding tcharding force-pushed the 02-24-release-0.30-blog-post branch from 3e8c775 to f679c0e Compare March 21, 2023 21:46
@tcharding
Copy link
Member Author

Changed date back to 21st to match the rust-bitcoin changelog heading. Also set timezone to UTC-7 and time to 20:00, I think the last 4 PRs can merge without conflict so @apoelstra might be able to get this out today?

Copy link
Member

@sanket1729 sanket1729 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wow, this is great. Thanks for putting in the effort :)

Copy link
Contributor

@Kixunil Kixunil left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ACK f679c0e

Copy link
Member

@apoelstra apoelstra left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ACK f679c0e

@tcharding tcharding merged commit bc52e89 into rust-bitcoin:master Mar 22, 2023
apoelstra added a commit to rust-bitcoin/rust-bitcoin that referenced this pull request Mar 22, 2023
ffee8ad Bump version to v0.30.0 (Tobin C. Harding)

Pull request description:

  Add changelog notes and bump the version number to v0.30.0.

  ## TODO - pre-merge

  - [x] Release `bitcoin_hashes` 0.12: #1694
  - [x] Release secp 0.27: rust-bitcoin/rust-secp256k1#588
    - rust-bitcoin/rust-secp256k1#590
  - [x] Update `secp256k1` dependency to use newly released v0.27: #1714
  - [x] Merge
    - ~#1696
    - #1695
    -  #1111
  - [x] If time permits merge these:
    - #1710
    - #1705
    - #1713
  - [x] Set the release date in changelog header
  - [x] And merge these:
    - #1721
    - #1720
    - #1719
    - #1717

  ## TODO  - post release
  - [ ] Release the blogpost: rust-bitcoin/www.rust-bitcoin.org#2
     - ~Set the date in the blog post to match the date 0.30 is released~

ACKs for top commit:
  sanket1729:
    reACK ffee8ad
  Kixunil:
    ACK ffee8ad
  apoelstra:
    ACK ffee8ad

Tree-SHA512: b0ea113ee1726fd9b263d0e01fe14bd544c007c05a9ac43b6c2d4edbeef3bb3ad456b061ef086626e1e1b27a0cda49cb6bc28aac3ad1691d72ffe00400ed5b45
@tcharding tcharding deleted the 02-24-release-0.30-blog-post branch March 22, 2023 02:17
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants