On 1/4/2013 6:02 AM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Walter Bright, el 3 de January a las 23:03 me escribiste:
On 1/3/2013 9:49 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
but other lines like
$(LI std.string: $(RED The implementations of std.string.format and
string.sformat have been replaced with improved implementations which conform
to writef. In some, rare cases, this will break code. Please see the
documentation for std.string.format and std.string.sformat for details.))
Yes, you can put this in as the bugzilla title, though I'd tighten it up a
little.
Are you being serious? Do you really think this would be useful for the
user? That the user will be able to spot that particular comment among
hundreds of bugs in a bugzilla search query result?
It's not hundreds. It's the new/changed list, which is rather short. It was a
little longer this time because it's been several months. Usually, it's just a
handful.
Is really that hard to acknowledge that release notes are better than
doing that? I can understand if you see problems on keeping up to date
the release notes, but I can't believe that anyone can think is plain
better to user bugzilla instead (for the user POV at least).
Can we at least agree on that and then see if is feasible to have good
and up to date release notes?
But we've done that before. It was not working.
I understand that, but I don't think that work should be optional and
only done if somebody feels like. Every pull request should include
proper documentation update. Can we try to focus on that for the next
release?
We are all volunteers. You are welcome to help out with this.
