--- name: release-notes description: Use when asked to write release notes — the announcement accompanying one specific release, aimed at users deciding whether and how it affects them — as distinct from a [[changelog]], which is the complete, cumulative running history across every version rather than one release's announcement. --- # Release Notes Release notes are the announcement that accompanies one specific release: what's new, what changed, and what a user needs to do about it. Unlike a changelog, they're written for a single moment — the release going out — and aimed at helping the reader decide whether and how to act, not to serve as the complete historical record. ## Key components - **What's new and why it matters** — the notable additions and changes in this release, explained in terms of the benefit or effect for the user, not just what was implemented. - **Breaking changes, called out separately** — anything that changes existing behavior in a way that can break an integration, in its own clearly labeled section, not interleaved with routine fixes. - **Upgrade or migration instructions** — concrete steps for moving from the previous version to this one, whenever a change (especially a breaking one) requires the user to do something beyond a normal version bump. - **Fixes and minor changes** — routine bug fixes and small improvements, listed but not competing for attention with the headline changes or breaking changes above them. - **Version and date** — which version this is and when it shipped, so readers can place it relative to other releases and the [[changelog]]. ## Why breaking changes need their own unmissable section A breaking change has a cost the reader must plan for — code to update, a config to change, a dependency to bump — and that cost is easy to miss if it's phrased like just another bullet point among routine fixes. A reader skimming release notes to decide "can I upgrade today" needs breaking changes to be the first thing they see, set apart visually and in wording, so the decision to upgrade (and the work it requires) is made deliberately rather than discovered later when something breaks in production. ## Common pitfalls - **Breaking changes buried in a long list of minor fixes** — a behavior-changing update mixed in alongside a dozen routine patches reads as equally minor, and gets missed by exactly the readers who needed to act on it before upgrading. - **Notes written for the release plan, not the actual shipped code** — drafted from the release ticket or original scope before the release was cut, and never reconciled against what actually shipped, so they describe a feature that got cut or omit one that got added late. - **No migration guidance for a breaking change that clearly needs one** — naming that something changed without saying what the reader should do about it forces them to reverse-engineer the fix themselves. - **Overly promotional tone that obscures the substance** — marketing language ("massively improved!") standing in for a concrete description of what actually changed leaves a technical reader unable to tell what to expect. - **Notes that don't match the changelog** — release notes and the underlying [[changelog]] entries for the same version drifting apart because one was updated and the other wasn't. - **No version or date** — makes it hard for a reader to tell which release these notes describe, especially once several releases have shipped since. ## Learn more - [[changelog]] for the complete, cumulative running history across every version that release notes are drawn from but don't replace. - [[readme-writing]] for the project overview that often links to the latest release notes rather than restating them. - [[api-documentation]] for the reference material that needs updating alongside any breaking change announced in release notes. - [[press-release]] for the external, publicity-facing announcement a major release sometimes also warrants, distinct from release notes aimed at existing technical users.