Eike Rathke wrote: > Hi Bernd, > > On Wednesday, 2007-11-14 10:06:21 +0100, Bernd Eilers wrote: > >>> Seconded. The "dirty" in the fall-back is that it doesn't preserve >>> formatting ;-) i.e. the text written should be surrounded by <pre> tags, >>> e.g. see i74918 in http://development.openoffice.org/releases/2.3.0.html >> >> Oh no Eike, that´s just a missing Feature on my side which I would need to >> fix ;-) > > Fine :) > >> What I consider bad on using this fallback is the problem that the >> feature-info is often to technical to be used for the release notes, eg. >> it´s often mentioning stuff like ChildWorkspaces where something got >> integrated etc. which the end user doesn´t know about what this is but >> well that may be only my impression. > > That's a matter of education then. Developers should get acquainted with > the idea that feature announcements should be written such that they're > end user compatible ;-)
Exactly. Feature mails never where intended to be understandable only to developers. And besides that: specs aren't better in this regard. ;-) We should see that a lot of small features and enhancements are done without a full spec. And IMHO this should not be changed. So specs can't be the default, only the fallback. Not for a missing feature mail but for an (intentionally) missing description. Ciao, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer (mba) - Project Lead OpenOffice.org Writer OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS Please don't reply to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]". I use it for the OOo lists and only rarely read other mails sent to it. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
