cut off NEWS.md file

[jangorecki]

It is getting too long IMO reaching as back as v1.10.0 (03 Dec 2016).

[TysonStanley]

I agree. If someone wants a history lesson on data.table there are other sources ;) Should we keep a five year NEWS.md?

[MichaelChirico]

I think the idea is to truncate the current file as (e.g.) NEWS.1.md and continue on, similar to how r-devel does it.

[TysonStanley]

Makes sense. So would we keep 1 or 2 years in the NEWS.md while putting the rest into NEWS.1.md? Looks like NEWS.0.md has 8 years of notes so unlikely to be much of a guide that way.

[MichaelChirico]

r-devel does a new NEWS for each major version, but we don't look to be going to 2.0.0+ any time soon. Maybe what makes sense for us is data.table-0.x.y in NEWS.0, then data.table-1.[0-9].y in NEWS.1.0, data.table-1.1[0-9].y in NEWS.1.1, data.table-1.2[0-9].y in NEWS.1.2, etc?

…

On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 7:13 AM Tyson Barrett ***@***.***> wrote: Makes sense. So would we keep 1 or 2 years in the NEWS.md while putting the rest into NEWS.1.md? Looks like NEWS.0.md has 8 years of notes so unlikely to be much of a guide that way. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#5775 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AB2BA5PHRG2KDZASHGTKTUDYH6TCRAVCNFSM6AAAAABABH7CZ6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQNBRG43TONRVGI> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: <Rdatatable/data. ***@***.***>

[jangorecki]

Or just keep all history of 3+ years in NEWS.0.md

[MichaelChirico]

Or just keep all history of 3+ years in NEWS.0.md

GitHub UI struggles with huge files, better to keep a few around IMO.

[jangorecki]

but CTRL+F is easier for single file on the other hand, and so old entries are rarely needed

[MichaelChirico]

Even loading huge files can be very slow. tests.Rraw is always causing issues. Current total length of NEWS.0 + NEWS is ~5,000 lines.

old entries are rarely needed

Yes, but "how old is old"? We also don't want to create a lot of churn in git history by e.g. copy-pasting an "old" release NEWS from "current" to "old" file. I'd rather this "relegation" happen rarely and exactly once.

[MichaelChirico]

Honestly with the change of maintainer I think we have a good enough reason to just rename NEWS on v<=1.14.10 as NEWS.1 and continue onward with new NEWS in 1.15.0+.

OTOH, we should make sure we don't need any more patches in 1.14.x series before we commit to the new file, so let's table this for closer to the 1.15.0 release.