There is no requirement to use cwiki that I know of. As long as the process is documented and produces acceptable results it should be fine.
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:08 PM Matthew Benedict de Detrich <[email protected]> wrote: > (I was meant to say Clear instead of clearly before) > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 3:07 PM Matthew Benedict de Detrich < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > The Lightbend release notes were already removed. I'm talking about > > the release process. > > Files like: > > * https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/RELEASING.md > > * > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/scripts/release-train-issue-template.md > > > > Clearly, I meant to say the release process earlier (sorry for using the > > wrong words) so my stance still stands, we should remove those and > replace > > them with our own (which we are doing) that follows the Apache process. > > > > It would be good to clarify if we are forced to use cwiki for release > > process but I suspect that we will end up using it anyway. > > > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:57 PM PJ Fanning <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> The Lightbend release notes were already removed. I'm talking about > >> the release process. > >> Files like: > >> * https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/RELEASING.md > >> * > >> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/blob/main/scripts/release-train-issue-template.md > >> > >> They are sort of getting in the way when trying to replace > >> Lightbend/Akka branding. We have other discussions open about the > >> release process and I really don't want this thread to turn into an > >> offset of those threads. > >> > >> The Pekko release notes should also be discussed in their own separate > >> thread. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-612 is a > >> discussion about the Github release feature. > >> > >> On Tue, 21 Feb 2023 at 14:45, Matthew Benedict de Detrich > >> <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> > > cwiki feels better controlled and less likely to be accidentally > >> modified > >> > without discussion on the mailing list. > >> > > >> > If the goal is to optimize for minimization of accidental modification > >> > without proper review, I would actually think purely as a tool having > >> the > >> > release notes in github would be far more effective due to its review > >> > system (i.e. PR's have to be approved before the matter of fact). > There > >> are > >> > also other technical advantages to having release notes on github > (wiki > >> or > >> > otherwise), i.e. release notes have a tendency to reference actual > code > >> (I > >> > can easily see this in our case with referencing and then documenting > >> sbt > >> > tasks/commands) which due to our source code also being hosted in > >> github is > >> > both more ergonomic and also less likely to get out of sync (which is > a > >> > common occurrence with disparate systems). > >> > > >> > That being said, it does seem there is strong precedent for having the > >> > release notes in cwiki rather than github (wiki or otherwise) and I > >> don't > >> > know if an escape hatch of "having release notes on github with a > >> reference > >> > on cwiki" is desirable or even appropriate. > >> > > >> > Regarding the Lightbend release notes, I am definitely all in for > >> removing > >> > them and referencing their site/docs if needed. > >> > > >> > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 2:17 PM Claude Warren, Jr > >> > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> > > +1 > >> > > > >> > > cwiki feels better controlled and less likely to be accidentally > >> modified > >> > > without discussion on the mailing list. > >> > > > >> > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 12:44 PM PJ Fanning <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > > >> > > > Hi everyone, > >> > > > So far, when updating the Github and Paradox markdown files, I've > >> tended > >> > > > to leave the Lightbend specific release train scripts and docs > >> behind. > >> > > Our > >> > > > release process will be similar but different. I think maybe, it's > >> about > >> > > > time to start pruning it. It's easier if anyone wants to reference > >> the > >> > > > Lightbend process to read it from the Akka repos or web site. > >> > > > > >> > > > It's a separate discussion but I'd prefer to see the Apache Pekko > >> release > >> > > > docs end up on cwiki.apache.org as opposed to in the Github > repos. > >> > > > > >> > > > Anyone with any opinions about this? > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > > >> > Matthew de Detrich > >> > > >> > *Aiven Deutschland GmbH* > >> > > >> > Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin > >> > > >> > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B > >> > > >> > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen > >> > > >> > *m:* +491603708037 > >> > > >> > *w:* aiven.io *e:* [email protected] > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >> > > > > -- > > > > Matthew de Detrich > > > > *Aiven Deutschland GmbH* > > > > Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin > > > > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B > > > > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen > > > > *m:* +491603708037 > > > > *w:* aiven.io *e:* [email protected] > > > > > -- > > Matthew de Detrich > > *Aiven Deutschland GmbH* > > Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin > > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B > > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen > > *m:* +491603708037 > > *w:* aiven.io *e:* [email protected] >
