Side by side
Auto vs Conventional Changelog
Both stand on release notes management software. Which one you can start free with, which one lets you read the code, and what each costs once you pay.
Free plan LinuxMacSelf-hosted+1
Auto combines pull request-driven versioning, changelog generation, and release publishing with a broad plugin system. Teams should account for its token requirements and plugin configuration rules when setting it up.
Visit Auto Free plan LinuxMacWindows
Visit Conventional Changelog The facts
| Auto | Conventional Changelog | |
|---|---|---|
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Open source | Not published | Not published |
| Runs on | Linux, Mac, Self-hosted, Windows | Linux, Mac, Windows |
| Lowest paid plan | Not published | Not published |
| Plans published | None | None |
| Maker | Not published | Not published |
| Website | intuit.github.io | github.com |
| On release notes management software | #1 of 16 | #4 of 16 |
Auto: what it does well
- Calculates semantic version bumps from pull request labels
- Can skip releases with a `skip-release` label
- Generates configurable changelogs with pull request links
- Supports publishing plugins for many package ecosystems
- Runs in CI or locally on major operating systems
What to know first
- Publishing requires a repository-permission `GH_TOKEN`
- Publishing plugins may require additional secrets
- Explicit plugin configuration overrides defaults
- Documentation advises using one package manager plugin at a time
Conventional Changelog: what it does well
Alternatives to Auto Alternatives to Conventional Changelog The whole list