Restore release notes creation step

[kwankyu]

fixes the issue discussed in https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/LFfhN0CpGJ8.

However, we retain the idea of #40709 that a github release is made only in one step in the workflow. Previously, before #40709, a github release was made in two steps "Create release" and "Create release assets". This strategy worked well but started failing some months ago.

Test (with #40840): https://github.com/kwankyu/sage/actions/runs/17846547780.

📝 Checklist

• The title is concise and informative.
• The description explains in detail what this PR is about.
• I have linked a relevant issue or discussion.
• I have created tests covering the changes.
• I have updated the documentation and checked the documentation preview.

⌛ Dependencies

[github-actions]

Documentation preview for this PR (built with commit b47b032; changes) is ready! 🎉
This preview will update shortly after each push to this PR.

[kwankyu]

Thanks!

[dimpase]

I think it's a questionable solution for a non-existent problem

[dimpase]

@saraedum - this is now marked "disputed"

[tobiasdiez]

This is very hard to evaluate since the PR description and title are misleading: release notes are currently created via

sage/.github/workflows/dist.yml

Line 143 in 83b52a7

generate_release_notes: true

so this PR cannot restore a release notes creation step, as its already there. Similarly, the linked https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/LFfhN0CpGJ8 discusses some issues of the release workflow that we are currently seeing for beta releases, but if my understanding of the changes here is correct then they would only have an affect on full releases. So this PR in particular doesn't help at all fixing the issues mentioned in the sage-devel post.

So please explicitly state what issue is solved by this PR, and what the effect of this PR is. Thanks.

[dimpase]

@saraedum @vbraun - a disputed PR has been merged without a resolution

[vbraun]

Sorry didn't see that the positive review was removed again, as always I can only go by the state at the time of merging

[dimpase]

Well, it seems that "In the Code of Conduct we trust" appears to be a religious dogma rather than something working...

[dimpase]

[kwankyu]

So please explicitly state what issue is solved by this PR, and what the effect of this PR is.

https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/YFQYrdziwe0/m/JcyqmGQTAwAJ

[dimpase]

this is a link to a long rant regarding a horrible, horrible state of Sage development in general.

No explanation of what this restored 20 lines are meant to be doing, and why Sage cannot be just like a normal project - a project which doesn't try to partition contributions into "beta" slots. Such a listing of contributions could be accomplished by the standard GH Action, and would be much more convenient to use than a plain text file without hyperlinks.

[tobiasdiez]

I guess it comes down to what kind of release notes one prefer for stable releases:

A: The minimal ones that show the changes since the previous RC:

B: The extended ones that show the changes since the previous stable release:

@vbraun any preference?

[vbraun]

I don't really have to do much with the release notes, those are downstream from making releases. But B) is obviously more useful for non-developers.

[kwankyu]

As this discussion needs attention of the community, I created a sage-devel thread:

https://groups.google.com/g/sage-devel/c/RlaicLMbEO8

where we can continue this discussion.

[tobiasdiez]

I don't really have to do much with the release notes, those are downstream from making releases. But B) is obviously more useful for non-developers.

It's just that you positively reviewed this PR whose only point is to replace option B by option A. So I thought you have strong reasons to prefer A over B.