On Mon, 22 Dec 2014 13:40:28 -0800, Ian Wells wrote: > Earlier I chose a format very similar to RedHat, an example below and > also at http://www.wellsi.homeip.net/rnotes/sme9/9bugreport.html > > (Are all the fields useful? URL and Description could be culled. A short > link would be good for the bottom)
Excellent Ian, "everything you wanted to know about an update but were too afraid to ask". Which URL? The one to the package or the one to the Server Manager documentation? The package URL is useful should applying the update fail, Is the package actually where it says it is? Able to quickly grab it for manual install etc. I don't see the Server Manger documentation URL having much use, surely any one running a system knows about Server Manager? If not, what would be of more use is a psuedo URL to the Server Manager: http://<your-server-name>.<your-server-domain>/server-manager or http://<your-server-ip>/server-manager The Description is useful. Package names are sometimes a bit cryptic. Unless you know what parts of the system a particular package affects you don't know if a problem with X after an update is likely to be due to the update or just a random event. For instance from further down your post I haven't a clue what "apr-util-0.9.4-22.el4.i386.rpm" does. I agree that upstream updates don't need the same level of detail as SME updates but the Description for them would still be useful, for the above reason. > The only part not automated is the "<Insert Update Text Here>" which > needs the Dev or someone in the bugzilla flow to give the text. > Personally I think that a custom text box should be added to bugzilla > and the release note take it from there. Seems like a sensible plan, automatic is the way to go. Great work Ian. -- Cheers Dave. _______________________________________________ Discussion about project organisation and overall direction To unsubscribe, e-mail [email protected] Searchable archive at http://lists.contribs.org/mailman/public/discussion/
