On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 6:29 AM, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Wed, Apr 01, 2009 at 12:43:04PM +0200, Morgan Collett wrote: >>On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 11:12, Jonas Smedegaard <d...@jones.dk> wrote: >>> - From a distributor point of view, it would be nice to be able to >>> look at the Homepage of each part of Sugar (sugar-toolkit, >>> sugar-base, sugar, hulahop, Browse, etc) and see not only a download >>> link for the latest and greatest release of that piece, but a >>> download link for the latest and greatest release for *each* of your >>> development tracks (i.e. currently 0.82, 0.84 and "bleeding edge") >>> and also a brief note on which changes are not backwards-compatible. >> >>+1 >> >>Also publishing the changelogs for each release would be good - >>currently they seem to be only sent in the release announcement mail. > > > With the risk of writing stuff that you all know better than me > already, let me elaborate a bit on that: > > There is several levels of "changes". In Debian we may have the > following, for each single software package: > > * VCS commit notes, describing each atomic edit > * Changelog entries, grouped per release > * NEWS items about eventual major changes, grouped by release > * Status pages, tracking newest events for each branch > * Long description, describing the product in few sentences > * Short description, describing the product in one line
As our activity ecosystem matures, I think that we will want to focus on setting a method for activity developers to _opt in_ to joining the Sugar Labs release cycle. It could start something simple like just a check list of items listed you and Morgan listed above. david > I probably forgot some. > > Above list is ordered in after how often it typically needs updating. > (yes, short and long descriptions are also a form of status info: Debian > Sugar packages currently mention that Sugar is mostly for XOs ;-) ). > > An important issue (that I thankfully haven't noticed abused at > Sugarlabs but frequently in Debian) is that each and every item in above > channels should be somewhat self-contained. It is ok to reference > external resources (like bug-number being closed) but it is wrong to > write "Fixed earlier problem properly now" without mentioning *what* > problem it is, in the entry itself. > > > - Jonas > > - -- > * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist og Internet-arkitekt > * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ > > [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) > > iEYEARECAAYFAknTUBkACgkQn7DbMsAkQLjvHwCeJpui2oc8eYzIeLGzJVLY2ZxI > 69UAoJX+VBL7FI689W5sUtWiBKjdLF11 > =xHeu > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > Sugar-devel mailing list > Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org > http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel > _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel