db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Myrna van Lunteren" <m.v.lunte...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: beta build version
Date Wed, 19 Mar 2008 20:43:28 GMT
On 3/19/08, Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hillegas@sun.com> wrote:
> > Also: The release instructions seem to suggest that the CHANGES file
> > was deprecated in 10.3, and that I shouldn't try to create it for
> > 10.4. Is that understanding correct?
> The release instructions certainly treat CHANGES as a deprecated file.
> Maybe Myrna or Kathey can shed some light on this issue.
> Regards,
> -Rick
> >
> >
> > Dyre
During the initial 10.3 process I looked at what was in the 10.2
'CHANGES' file (note: not 'CHANGES.html') and it was fairly identical
to what was in the release notes.
There was a discussion about it and I think I concluded
'RELEASE-NOTES.html' was enough.
I think part of this discussion is maybe in this thread:

However, subsequently, there was discussion to the effect that we
should not have all changes in the Release Notes, instead, we should
only have those affecting (end-)users. Thus the 'CHANGES.html' file
was born, listing (also, I think) changes not visible to end-users.

Part of the discussion can be followed in this thread:

In my edits of the wiki I left a reference to 'CHANGES' - not
'CHANGES.html' - for the possibility we'd pull another release off the
10.2 branch. I agree the name is confusing. But what better name for a
file to list the changes? It's unlikely now that we'll pull another
release off 10.2, probably better to remove reference to the 10.2
'CHANGES' file and only mention 'CHANGES.html'.


View raw message