Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of rick.hillegas@oracle.com
 designates 148.87.113.117 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <4FE87438.3030209@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 07:22:48 -0700
From: Rick Hillegas <rick.hillegas@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: derby-dev@db.apache.org
Subject: Re: Splitting up the fixed issues listing in the release notes
References: <4FE86C45.3030307@oracle.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FE86C45.3030307@oracle.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 6/25/12 6:48 AM, Kristian Waagan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> While looking through the release notes for 10.9 it occurred to me 
> that rather many of the issues listed under "Bug Fixes" aren't of 
> particular interest for users of Derby, and that those that are of 
> interest may be somewhat hard to find in the long list.
>
> Do people think it makes sense to split up the list of fixed bugs into 
> several sections, for instance product fixes, docs and web site fixes 
> ,and test fixes?
>
> I chose the two additional categories because they stand out 
> relatively clearly. Maybe I'm wrong, but I imagine some users would 
> want to skip the test issues, look at the docs issues to see if there 
> have been fixes to relevant areas, and look at the list of product 
> fixes out of curiosity or to check if there may be fixes that address 
> particular problems they are seeing with Derby.
>
> I've attached an example, and a diff showing the required changes to 
> the build tools. There are details to settle for a final version of 
> this functionality.
>
>
> Regards,
Hi Kristian,

This seems like a step in the right direction. It's less brittle than 
the alternative approach of adding a new JIRA field to flag which issues 
deserve to turn up in the release notes. A further refinement might be 
to exclude the issues in the Test and Website components.

I spotted a null release id in the first sentence of the "Bug Fixes" 
section.

Thanks,
-Rick