maven-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason van Zyl <>
Subject Re: [ANN] Maven 2.0.6 Released
Date Mon, 02 Apr 2007 19:14:36 GMT

On 2 Apr 07, at 2:03 PM 2 Apr 07, Emmanuel Venisse wrote:

> Joakim Erdfelt a écrit :
>> Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>> On 2 Apr 07, at 1:01 PM 2 Apr 07, Wendy Smoak wrote:
>>>> On 4/1/07, Jason van Zyl <> wrote:
>>>>> On 1 Apr 07, at 9:04 AM 1 Apr 07, Brett Porter wrote:
>>>>>> Should this include the full change log like previous releases?
>>>>> I added a pointer to the roadmap, I don't think we need to  
>>>>> entirely
>>>>> replicate the list produced by JIRA. But users should be able to
>>>>> navigate from the release notes to the full list of fixes.
>>>> IMO, the list needs to be in svn (and I added it).  JIRA issues  
>>>> can be
>>>> reopened and edited, and may disappear from the generated list.
>>> So then the pointers to those issues are just as meaningless. If you
>>> don't retain some integrity in the issue management system then  
>>> what's
>>> the point really?
>>> Just copying text around doesn't have much value. I don't think it
>>> happens that often that an issue is removed. If any text is going to
>>> be added it should be the changes text with full descriptions. I  
>>> don't
>>> see much use in copying text out of JIRA.
>> +1 for static release notes content.
>> I think that if a jira issue gets re-opened, then the linked jira  
>> report
>> will then be out of date.
>> Also, if a reorganization of the jira occurs, the release  
>> information is
>> lost too.
>> Also, if jira isn't available, the release notes are also not  
>> available.
>> I'm in favor of static release notes.
> Me too. And we can generate it easily with swizzle.

Provide no human has to go scrape it out that would be fine. It just  
seems dumb to copy it from one system to another. One end or the the  
other is going to be inaccurate when people shuffle around issues.  
 From the static document you will be pointing at information which  
is no longer there, or rearranged. In the a link to the dynamic view  
some issues would no longer be a part of the roadmap. How many issue  
have ever been reopened from a roadmap of a released? Five? And  
really, if an issues was reopened, moved to another fix version and  
actually corrected which view is more correct? I would say the  
dynamic one at any point in time.


> Emmanuel
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message