Sorry, I've been updating CHANGEs as I go (habit carried over from
Lucene-land!).
I think I favor update-as-you-go for various reasons:
* The person who made the fix knows best what to say, while it's
still fresh on their mind, vs RM who has to re-interpret, from a
distance, some time later, which can be tricky (eg the new U+FFFD
char from TIKA-698 was non-obvious I think).
* It minimizes work that the RM must do. I think, ideally, releases
are a very minimal, near-push-button,
doesn't-require-prior-expertise, process, if possible.
* At any time, we all (and users) can glance at trunk's CHANGES to
see what's coming in the next release; this can also help us size
up when's a good time to do a new release.
* Somewhat less risky that we miss a change (eg I've been leaving
issues open to remind us to do TODOs once we upgrade to new
PDFBox/POI, though in light of this maybe I should not do that!).
Mike McCandless
http://blog.mikemccandless.com
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Nick Burch <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi All
>
> Quick query - I notice that some people are updating CHANGES.txt when they
> close out issues. I had thought that part of the release process was going
> through the FIXED list in JIRA to build that up, so I hadn't been doing it.
>
> What's the view here, should we be doing it on most things, just major
> things, or holding off for the release manager to do it from a JIRA report?
>
> Cheers
> Nick
>
