+1 to diff checking - I too have started doing that. It's helpful in identifying new dependencies or version changes that get introduced.
-Marshall On 3/31/2016 2:49 AM, Richard Eckart de Castilho wrote: > Btw. I feel that in general a more diff-based approach may be good. > Rechecking the same old boring things over and over again every release > could be done automatically. E.g. in the last Ruta release, I started > the review process by actually looking at the list of changed files, > pom diff, etc. > > Cheers, > > -- Richard > >> On 31.03.2016, at 08:39, Richard Eckart de Castilho <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> So do I. Two of the issues are related to the build. The other >> is indeed a significant improvement but not a critical issue. >> Also, the README contains a link to the complete overview on >> JIRA. >> >> On the other hand, it also kind of depends on how intensively >> an RC re-check is typically being done. E.g. if I do another RC >> and upload it, does it make sense to check everything from scratch >> (I usually do that) or is it sufficient to stick mostly to a check >> of the differences. >> >> In case of a "light" check, I think it would be good to have the >> complete record of issues. >> >> -- Richard >> >>> On 31.03.2016, at 00:31, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I'm leaning toward thinking it isn't critical... >>> >>> What do others think? >>> >>> -Marshall >
