geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: The 3.0-M1 release notes need some attention.
Date Wed, 26 May 2010 16:08:06 GMT

On May 26, 2010, at 8:32 AM, Rick McGuire wrote:

> I've done a quick pass through the 3.0-M1 release notes, but I need a little help to
get this updated for creating a release candidate.  This is the first time I've done of these,
so I have a few questions on how this gets pulled together.
> 
> 1)  The version in here is listed as @VERSION@.  Is that something the release plugin
updates automatically when the release is prepared or does this require a manual search-and-replace
operation?  I notice that the 2.2 version of this still says @VERSION@.  Was that just an
oversite, or is that convention.

That's a mistake I don't really know how to fix in a reasonable manner.  I guess you have
to edit it by hand before the release and restore it by hand afterwards  I thought there was
some filtering operation that filled it in but I was wrong.
> 
> 2)  Are there tools (or standard Jira searches) available for generating the various
lists of issues included in the release notes?
yes.... you can look at the jiras for a release and theres a link or button to get a text
output.  However, I think 99% of the 3.0 jiras aren't closed even if the feature is fairly
complete due to not really knowing the tck status of the area.  I'd be very tempted to just
have a short list of features we've partly implemented and skip the jira list.

david jencks

> 
> 3)  What enhancements should we be listing here?  I took a quick first pass, but please
make additions/corrections to the list I've put together.  I know there are some things missing
like the Global JNDI enhancements and the Datasource resource bindings and I suspect the Aries
feature list is incomplete.  Please help me fill this out.
> 
> 4)  What should we list for supported features?  The wording currently there is definitely
wrong.  How should we phrase this?
> 
> 5)  There are obviously lots of limitations here.  What should we be listing?
> 
> Rick


Mime
View raw message