Kathey Marsden (JIRA) wrote:
I think we just need a release note
I agree. In fact, we already have one, but I think it's in the wrong place. I updated the file "trunk/CHANGES" some time ago to add the note below. However, I think that we are no longer using the "CHANGES" file for these sorts of things, but rather are putting this information into the JIRA entries? Is the current convention as simple as: 1) Edit the JIRA issue to check the "release note needed" checkbox 2) Add a comment to the JIRA issue, with the information as suggested by http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/ReleaseNoteFormat 3) Somebody intends to run some sort of a JIRA report at some point, collect up all these special comments, and edit them into a simple document If that's correct, let me know and I'll summarize it in the Wiki somewhere (and I'll also add my comment to DERBY-668). thanks, bryan P.S. Here's what's in trunk/CHANGES; what do you think? *) The sysinfo tool now prints additional information about the origin of the classes and jars that it examines. The origin of a class might be: an entry in the application classpath, an entry in a class loader location list, a jar fetched due to being listed in the manifest entry of another jar, a standard extension in the JRE's extensions directory, a jar installed into the application server, or any of various other possibilities. Note that when sysinfo runs under a Java security manager, it may need special permissions to access this additional information, including the permission to read the java.class.path property, and the permission to call getProtectionDomain on a class. If sysinfo is not granted these permissions, it will display an error message about the security problem in place of displaying the class origin information. (DERBY-668) [ Bryan Pendleton ]
