Skip to content

Updated revision history for CHANGES.md#225

Merged
barbeau merged 2 commits intogoogle:masterfrom
MobilityData:update-revision-history
Jun 2, 2020
Merged

Updated revision history for CHANGES.md#225
barbeau merged 2 commits intogoogle:masterfrom
MobilityData:update-revision-history

Conversation

@sccmcca
Copy link
Contributor

@sccmcca sccmcca commented May 28, 2020

Updated GTFS revision history for transit/gtfs/CHANGES.md as of May 28, 2020. The revision history was last updated January 2019, with some historical entries missing.

If you have feedback or if I missed anything major, please let me know.

Updated GTFS revision history for transit/gtfs/CHANGES.md as of May 21, 2020. The revision history was last updated January 2019, with some historical entries missing. If you have feedback or if I missed anything major, please let me know.
@googlebot
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for your pull request. It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project (if not, look below for help). Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

📝 Please visit https://cla.developers.google.com/ to sign.

Once you've signed (or fixed any issues), please reply here with @googlebot I signed it! and we'll verify it.


What to do if you already signed the CLA

Individual signers
Corporate signers

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

gtfs/CHANGES.md Outdated

#### October 2, 2018

* Factorized field types for concision. See [discussion](https://github.com/google/transit/pull/104).
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

concision -> conciseness

gtfs/CHANGES.md Outdated

#### March 20, 2020

* Added recommendation for handling TripUpdate predictions for multiple trips in the same block. See [discussion](https://github.com/google/transit/pull/206).
Copy link
Contributor

@barbeau barbeau May 28, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This file has historically been used only for static GTFS revision history.

However, unless I'm missing something, it looks like the Google website that has the GTFS-RT revision history:
https://developers.google.com/transit/gtfs-realtime/guides/revision-history

...never made it into the GitHub repo. There is an equivalent CHANGES.md for GTFS-RT:
https://github.com/google/transit/blob/master/gtfs-realtime/CHANGES.md

...but it's missing the revision history.

So we need to decide if we keep all GTFS and GTFS-RT revisions in the same document, or if we split them across two files.

In any case, the Google website revision history should be migrated into this GitHub repo somewhere.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good catch. I meant to include only the updated revision history for static GTFS only.

I noticed as well that there was no GTFS-RT revision history at https://github.com/google/transit/blob/master/gtfs-realtime/CHANGES.md

I would be for adding it there.

@drewda
Copy link

drewda commented May 28, 2020

@scmcca thanks for helping with this housekeeping

@barbeau I for one think that it would be most useful to track static and RT changes in separate places (still important to have both)

related #215

@sccmcca
Copy link
Contributor Author

sccmcca commented Jun 2, 2020

@googlebot I signed it!

@googlebot
Copy link
Collaborator

CLAs look good, thanks!

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

@googlebot googlebot added cla: yes and removed cla: no labels Jun 2, 2020
@barbeau barbeau merged commit 102179f into google:master Jun 2, 2020
@barbeau barbeau deleted the update-revision-history branch June 2, 2020 21:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants