I agree with Caty, but by "Developers" I understand "Extension Developers", who might be interested in new Java APIs (e.g. related to writing Java-based rendering macros). Of course, we should provide examples in the RN.
Thanks, Marius On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 12:41 PM Ecaterina Moraru (Valica) < vali...@gmail.com> wrote: > I would also keep the term "Developers". Not sure why we would change that > name. XWiki is a development platform, we have users that are developers. > > Thanks, > Caty > > On Wed, Jan 30, 2019 at 12:37 PM Simon Urli <simon.u...@xwiki.com> wrote: > > > Hi Vincent, > > > > On 30/01/2019 09:05, Vincent Massol wrote: > > > Hi guys, > > > > > > No opinions ? > > > > > > Thanks > > > -Vincent > > > > > >> On 25 Jan 2019, at 09:31, Vincent Massol <vinc...@massol.net> wrote: > > >> > > >> Hi devs, > > >> > > >> Context > > >> ======= > > >> > > >> It’s been since we’ve deviated from the original purpose of the > Release > > Notes by also adding developer-oriented release notes. > > >> > > >> The goal of the Release Notes was to **highlight** important novelties > > for our **users**, because looking at the JIRA list is too technical > > (otherwise we could simply use the Release feature of JIRA! :)). > > >> > > >> So you may ask why we do have a “Developer” Category in the RN app. > > These were not for pure developers but for XWiki users who are more > > advanced and can write scripts in wiki pages. And when it’s the case we > > **must** add examples, otherwise, it’s completely useless. > > >> > > >> For example this morning I saw this RN added: > > >> > > > https://www.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/ReleaseNotes/Data/XWiki/11.0/Change004/ > > >> > > >> This is typically something that has very little value to me: > > >> * It’s for pure developers (java devs) > > >> * It’s not understandable by anyone except the person who coded it or > > participated to the dev mailing list discussion about it > > >> * It doesn’t say more than what’s in the JIRA issue so what’s the > point? > > >> * There are no examples at all in it! > > >> * Real developers can simply look at the reference documentation or > can > > read the JIRAs. We always link the JIRA issues in the RN anyway (it was > for > > this reason that we’re listing them). > > >> * It takes time to write RN items and thus it needs to have high value > > >> > > >> Proposal > > >> ======== > > >> > > >> * Go back to the original idea and only list developer RN items when > > they are for scripting users and not APIs. For example, document some new > > script service or some additions to existing script services. Of course > > Groovy would allow you to call any API so being able to use it from > Groovy > > is not a good criteria. I’d say that the criteria should be whether the > > Release Note Change is useful for Velocity users. > > >> * Rename “Developers” into “Scripters” or or “Advanced Users” (any > > better name?) > > >> * Always put an example when writing a “developer” change and take the > > time to explain properly what it’s about. > > >> > > >> WDYT? > > > > Actually reading the examples you give, I'm a bit mixed: I agreed that > > for the first one "the PropertyDisplayType" an example might be given: > > can be good to actually have the "example" box in the RN form. > > > > For the second one about legacy profile activated, actually I don't > > really know what's the impact for the users, and if he could change > > something about it. So I don't see how we could provide an example. > > > > So I have the feeling that the first one could be indeed adressed to > > Scripters (and even there, it's not a new scripting API, they could only > > use it in groovy scripts). And that the second one can be important for > > some administrators, but not for Scripters on the contrary. > > > > I might be wrong here but "Scripters" does not fit IMO and trying to > > find a new name might lead to create new categories actually. > > To be a bit more constructive I'd say that maybe for those changes we > > should not focus on a role but just say "Advanced changes". > > > > My 2 cents, > > Simon > > >> > > >> Thanks > > >> -Vincent > > >> > > > > > > > -- > > Simon Urli > > Software Engineer at XWiki SAS > > simon.u...@xwiki.com > > More about us at http://www.xwiki.com > > >
