I'm pretty sure a lot of the API and gradle changes were important to leave
in there, but I still accepted it because I just want to move on. :P

On Tue Feb 03 2015 at 9:55:30 AM Andrew Grieve <[email protected]> wrote:

> Did some pruning: https://github.com/cordova/apache-blog-posts/pull/30
>
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Michal Mocny <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Its nice when people have a place to look up what changed when they
> notice
> > a new version is out.  (Also, when we do a tools release and updated
> pinned
> > platforms, we can point back to these posts).  Additionally, some of our
> > users have come to this list asking for a blog post just recently, so its
> > not completely unread..
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 6:06 AM, Joe Bowser <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > I don't really like how this is part of the release process at all, and
> > the
> > > only reason that I'm doing it is because we have to for some reason.  I
> > > don't really think any of our users actually read this, and I really
> just
> > > want to see this done so that it can't be used as an excuse to not ship
> > > 4.0.x.  I think that the blog posts should be completely decoupled from
> > the
> > > release process, since my desire to see software released is completely
> > > different from my desire to further condense release notes that I don't
> > > think our users read.
> > > On Mon Feb 02 2015 at 2:36:21 PM Josh Soref <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I sent a basic pull request.
> > > >
> > > > Offhand, that list should probably be shortened a bit more.
> > > >
> > > > Note that if something didn't change between the current release and
> > > > 3.7.0, readers of the release announcement don't care. I can't figure
> > out
> > > > if some gradle changes were superceeded by others, or relate to
> > different
> > > > gradle env targets, if they were superceeded, the ones that don't
> apply
> > > as
> > > > of 3.7.0 should of course be dropped.
> > > >
> > > > Offhand, CB-4914 could probably be dropped; CB-8204 probably should
> be
> > > > dropped; one instance of CB-8143 should probably be dropped (or not,
> if
> > > > they're really different things/for different targets). CB-7410
> should
> > > > probably be dropped too.
> > > >
> > > > It's also helpful to group things by area.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to