Let RELEASE.md link out to practices on using github-activity

[consideRatio]

I want us to link to a central source of truth with regards to advice on how to make the changelog, as compared to inlining them in the individual project's RELEASE.md files. Like that, we can reduce the toil for updating things as details change.

As an example of change we can do in a single place instead of in each RELEASE.md going onwards, github-activity >0.3.0 will filter out a few bots we use in the contributor lists so we don't need to mention needing to do that.

[GeorgianaElena]

Thanks @consideRatio! Personally, I believe the practices on using github-activity should live in this repository and then have the team-compass docs link to this. This way we will have only one source of truth that we can update in just one place? Do you have another workflow in mind?

[consideRatio]

I hear that you want a source of truth and considers where that source of truth is located @GeorgianaElena. To me location we put the source of truth isn't important in itself, but think its really important that the source of truth is version controlled in one place at most so that we don't end up needing to update it across multiple github repositories if it change. Since this repository's files are copied, I'd very much like to avoid having it as part of the files in this repo.

[GeorgianaElena]

@consideRatio, I've opened jupyterhub/outreachy#197 because I believe this would make a good Outreachy project.

Maybe that will give more insight about what I had in mind for this repo.

controlled in one place at most so that we don't end up needing to update it across multiple github repositories if it change.

For me, this is the point of this repo, to be the most up to date version of the practices we are following, so that any new project will be following the latest version. But also, this will be the place to go to when updating an existing project that was not actively maintained for some time, for example.
What do you think about this? Do you think such idea makes sense?

[consideRatio]

But also, this will be the place to go to when updating an existing project that was not actively maintained for some time, for example.

I agree and see this project as the reference to initialize and update projects against, but I want to minimize things we need to update. If something already is or could be made project unspecific, then I think we should avoid duplicating it across projects.

I see the github-activity usage advice as similar to a code of conduct text for example, it doesn't have to be project specific and should therefore not be duplicated across projects.

[minrk]

Since release practices and changelog things change over time, minimizing the churn in template files which need updating in every repo makes sense. Linking to a central source reduces that churn. Perhaps moving it from a GitHub issue to something in the team-compass documentation will make it a more official source of information.

[consideRatio]

Thanks @GeorgianaElena and @minrk for thinking about this!

I'm aiming for making a team-compass docs PR about generating changelogs, and then linking to that team-compas docs destination.

[consideRatio]

@GeorgianaElena @minrk I've opened jupyterhub/team-compass#679 to update the team-compass docs to house info, allowing the changelog creation part be documented there instead of either in individual RELEASE.md files or a github issue in team-compass.

If you have time, please review that PR, then I'll update this!

[consideRatio]

Wiee this PR is now updated to link to the team-compass docs!

[GeorgianaElena]

Thanks @consideRatio and @minrk! 🚀