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) 20 days 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) 20 days 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