the release tarball is a repo snapshot. do you want a generated changelog? Op ma 18 mei 2015 om 13:30 schreef Sebastien Goasguen <run...@gmail.com>:
> > > On May 18, 2015, at 1:14 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > I don't like the writing of a changelog in the root, it is in git > already. > > Even in a release tarball ? > > > The comments should be good and describing the changes. The changes > should > > be small enough to be described adequately in a short changelog. That's > why > > I don't like squashing anything but the very trivial. > > > > Op ma 18 mei 2015 om 11:50 schreef Erik Weber <terbol...@gmail.com>: > > > >> On a related note, commits should reference the JIRA ticket as well. > >> > >> -- > >> Erik > >> > >> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 11:27 AM, Wilder Rodrigues < > >> wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Okay, > >>> > >>> +1 for create the ACS Jira issue for improvements as well. > >>> > >>> Since Xen and Libvirt redesign will be on 4.6 - and are already > >> documented > >>> - I will just create 2 issues so we have a way of keeping track of > them. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> Wilder > >>> > >>> > >>> On 18 May 2015, at 11:16, Stephen Turner <stephen.tur...@citrix.com > >>> <mailto:stephen.tur...@citrix.com>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Speaking for my XenCenter team again, for things like that we would > have > >>> an improvement ticket, pointing to the wiki page. > >>> > >>> By the way, this also allows us to schedule the work on our sprint, but > >> we > >>> had the policy even before we were doing Scrum. In a large, > distributed, > >>> volunteer organisation, I would argue that it's even more important to > be > >>> able to trace the change back to its reason, now and later. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Stephen Turner > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Wilder Rodrigues [mailto:wrodrig...@schubergphilis.com] > >>> Sent: 18 May 2015 10:11 > >>> To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org<mailto:dev@cloudstack.apache.org> > >>> Subject: Re: Preparing for 4.6 > >>> > >>> Hi there, > >>> > >>> I agree with the Jira ticket for the "new features, important fixes, > >>> security fixes" > >>> > >>> But I don’t think only about "new features, important fixes, security > >>> fixes”. I put most of my time in make the code better and tested, for > >> what > >>> we call refactoring/rewriting/redesigning. Should we also create Jira > >>> issues for that and mark them as Improvement? > >>> > >>> Taking into account the [VPC] Virtual Router, Citrix Resource Base and > >>> Libvirt Computing Resource refactoring, we had only internal issues on > >>> Jira. However, the changes have been documented on the 4.5/4.6 sections > >> of > >>> the Apache / Developers / Design Documents wiki: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Refactor+for+Redundant+Virtual+Router+Implementation > >>> > >>> > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Refactoring+XenServer+Hypervisor+Plugin > >>> > >>> The Libvirt documentation is on its way, since the PR was pushed only > >> last > >>> week. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> Wilder > >>> > >>> > >>> On 18 May 2015, at 10:39, Stephen Turner <stephen.tur...@citrix.com > >>> <mailto:stephen.tur...@citrix.com><mailto:stephen.tur...@citrix.com>> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> In my XenCenter dev team at Citrix, we have the policy of requiring a > >>> ticket number on every commit. If we find a bug and there isn't > already a > >>> ticket, we create a ticket before committing the fix. I guess I've just > >> dug > >>> through history too many times to understand why something that appears > >>> wrong was done, only to find an inadequate description at the end of > the > >>> trail. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Stephen Turner > >>> > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: Erik Weber [mailto:terbol...@gmail.com] > >>> Sent: 18 May 2015 09:32 > >>> To: dev > >>> Subject: Re: Preparing for 4.6 > >>> > >>> On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Rene Moser <m...@renemoser.net > <mailto: > >>> m...@renemoser.net><mailto:m...@renemoser.net>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Hi > >>> > >>> On 15.05.2015 11:27, Sebastien Goasguen wrote: > >>> Folks, > >>> > >>> As we prepare to try a new process for 4.6 release it would be nice to > >>> start paying attention to master. > >>> > >>> - Good commit messages > >>> > >>> The question is, what makes a commit message good? Maybe this helps: > >>> > >>> http://secure-web.cisco.com/1cOtAU9lruLvoJl9SBdNSTHN6eyvml6nO5JlwT8_V2 > >>> d_Y7wsnHAV3NiHTOya0cRQyt1WuG_fzithwjk4Qu-l3usM-B_yzy7V4qaxtoDIlEixysid > >>> QZ0ZbuK0YMNgknwBUaRUBJYNkjfGoppsXIpUXcmRvOH565otFMCmJUX2mfkrj_z5Vwm0wh > >>> PDqu2ZkGk1a/http%3A%2F%2Fchris.beams.io%2Fposts%2Fgit-commit%2F > >>> > >>> - Reference to a JIRA bug > >>> > >>> Must there be a JIRA bug? I did some commits without jira bugs in the > >>> past. But I noticed that those are not "tracked" in the changelog of > the > >>> new release. So should there be a policy (is there?) that there must > be a > >>> jira bug for fixes? > >>> > >>> > >>> I believe there should be a JIRA bug for most things. JIRA is a good > >> place > >>> to document why you're doing something, it's also easy to use as a > source > >>> for release notes as you discovered. > >>> It's also good practice to document bugs/fixes, it's generally easier > to > >>> find JIRA bugs than it is to find commit messages - especially for > >>> non-developers / newbies. > >>> > >>> For major code commits (new features, important fixes, security fixes) > >> I'd > >>> say it should be a requirement, but I don't know if it already is or > not. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> - Squashing commits ( cc/ wilder :)) > >>> > >>> This really depends. I would not generally prefer squashing commits. > >>> > >>> The example of > >>> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/commits/master?page=2 is more an > >>> example of "bad" commit messages. > >>> > >>> If you look at the commits, they make sense but the commit message > >>> indicates that they cover similar work in different aspects, which they > >>> actually don't. > >>> > >>> But if you look at this example here > >>> > >>> https://github.com/ansible/ansible-modules-extras/commits/devel?author > >>> =gregdek where you can see dozens of similar commits, those should be > >>> squashed. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> +1 to squashing related commits where it makes sense to do so > >>> -1 to a general rule of squashing the whole PR > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Erik > >>> > >>> > >> > >
