db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dyre.Tjeldv...@Sun.COM
Subject Re: some comments on the 10.4 beta distribution
Date Tue, 01 Apr 2008 09:02:38 GMT
Dyre.Tjeldvoll@Sun.COM writes:

> Kim Haase <Camilla.Haase@Sun.COM> writes:
>
>> Good catches, Rick. Should there be a a JIRA issue for this? Or
>> perhaps more than one? I think only the first two are specific to the
>> docs. Also, which NOTICE are we talking about? The one in the code
>> trunk seems to have been updated, and the one in the docs trunk
>> doesn't have a copyright notice.
>
> I'm wondering how much of this is covered by step 1 under 
> 'Check-ins just before generating release artifacts' in the relase
> instructions on the Wiki:
>
> http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/DerbySnapshotOrRelease

Those instructions are actually a bit terse. The actual wording is 

"Also adjust version numbers in documentation by modifying the
appropriate *conrefs.dita files."

There are actually a number of such files

dt136804@khepri32~/derby/docs-10.4$ find . -name '*conrefs.dita'
./src/ja_JP/getstart/gsconrefs.dita
./src/ja_JP/conrefs.dita
./src/pt_BR/adminguide/adminconrefs.dita
./src/pt_BR/ref/refconrefs.dita
./src/pt_BR/getstart/gsconrefs.dita
./src/conrefs.dita
./conrefs.dita

I assume that only those under src are of interest. Seems only two files
actually conatin the string '10.3':
M      src/conrefs.dita
M      src/ja_JP/conrefs.dita

If that's all that needs to be done, I can check in the change.

>
> I didn't do that for the beta, since it is listed as something you do
> when creating the release candidate. But I guess those files might as well have
> been updated right after cutting the branch... (and possibly updated
> later).



>
>>
>> Kim
>>
>> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>> I have downloaded the source distribution of the 10.4 beta and have
>>> a couple comments. After unpacking this distribution, I was able to
>>> build the docs and I was able to generate a release. The links from
>>> index.html worked. So the structure of the beta looks good to
>>> me. The release notes looked sketchy, but I've already sent mail
>>> about that. In addition, the following looked odd:
>>>
>>> o In the user guides, should "Copyright 2004-2007" be changed to
>>> "Copyright 2004-2008"?
>>>
>>> o The version number in the user documentation is 10.3, not 10.4
>>>
>>> o In the JDBC3 public api, there's a spurious line just before the
>>> title of the top-left frame. The line reads: 'Apache Derby 10.4 API
>>> Documentation">'
>>>
>>> o The NOTICE file says "Copyright 2004-2007". Should that be changed
>>> to "Copyright 2004-2008"?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Rick
>>
>
> -- 
> dt
>

-- 
dt

Mime
View raw message