On 9/9/11 2:40 PM, Myrna van Lunteren wrote:
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 8:53 AM, Dag H. Wanvik<[email protected]> wrote:
Hi,
thanks for assembling this, Myrna.
Myrna van Lunteren<[email protected]> writes:
DERBY-5331 Incorrect use of CharsetEncoder in DDMWriter
DERBY-5354 Remove unnecessary dita.regex build target
DERBY-5318 Use assertDirectoryDeleted in ReplicationRun and remove dead code
DERBY-5314 Enable i18n tests in non-English locales
DERBY-5291 testDerby4137_TransactionTimeoutSpecifiedNotExceeded
DERBY-5262 Running JUnit tests with Java 1.4.2 fails if the package private
DERBY-5253 Engine code references
DERBY-5252 make GrantRevokeTest pass in non-English locale
DERBY-5251 make ErrorCodeTest pass in non-English locale
DERBY-5247 Warnings regarding XPath displayed when generating JavaDoc
DERBY-5211 Make SysinfoCPCheckTest pass in non-English locale
DERBY-2625 SEVERE error involving column-width property
DERBY-2623 SEVERE error involving column-number property
DERBY-3337 convert jdbcapi/derbyStress.java to JUnit
DERBY-5084 convert ijConnName.sql to a ScriptTest junit test
DERBY-1903 Convert largedata/LobLimits.java to junit
These are not user visible changes and could be left out, I think.
Rest looks good to me!
Thanks,
Dag
Thanks for the review (Rick too)!
I did a little experiment, to see if I could tweak my filter, and I
succeeded in getting most - but not all - issues you mentioned by
removing the 'Test' component. I didn't think I should manually adjust
the release notes.
That sounds like the right approach. Hand-editing the release notes
would be a brittle solution.
However, I then checked on what Rick has done for e.g. 10.8.1 and test
issues, which end-users wouldn't see, were included in the release
notes for that release also, look e.g. for DERBY-5174 in those.
I remember - maybe incorrectly - that Apache instructs us to include a
record of *all* changes that went into a release, I think that's why
we're including test and build changes (as well as changes to source
that hasn't been in any official release). I think this is related to
the fact that our apache release also includes a source distribution.
I believe that a similar discussion came up in the past about whether we
should exclude documentation changes from our release notes. I imagine
there are people out there who are only interested in behavioral changes
to the product. The extra detail in our release notes won't be useful to
them.
I don't get the sense that we're swamping signal with noise. However,
that's just my opinion.
So I think those bugs will stay in the release notes...
Rick, as the most recent release manager, if I'm going off track with
my reasoning, let me know...
If people feel strongly that the release notes are too verbose, then we
should discuss how to flag noise issues in JIRA. That way we can
programmatically exclude them from the filters. It's late in the day to
do this for 10.8.2 but we could consider this change for 10.9.
Thanks,
-Rick
Myrna
