accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Keith Turner <ke...@deenlo.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] CHANGES Documents
Date Thu, 20 Feb 2014 17:39:25 GMT
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2/20/14, 9:09 AM, Keith Turner wrote:
>
>> footnote reference to SCM/JIRA for the full list of changes. But, is
>>> >there another role the CHANGES file is expected to play which I'm
>>> >overlooking?
>>> >
>>>
>> I think one value of whats currently in the CHANGES file is that by
>> scanning it you may find out about something thats very important to you.
>> No one else thought it was important and it was not included in the nice
>> user friendly summary.
>>
>>
>>
> I have definitely had that happen to me perusing the HDFS CHANGES file
> before. That's why I'm a fan of keeping a "complete" CHANGES file.
>

Me too.  I can't think of a good reason to make choosing between user
friendly release notes and the exhaustive list from jira an XOR.  The only
argument that slightly concerned me was Christophers predicition of a huge
changes file (but it would compress nicely).  I think thats a bridge we
could cross later and make decisions about like ageing off older data.  We
do not need to make decisions about that now.

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message