Re: request for your comments on release documentation
On Jun 12, 2013, at 11:49 AM, Hiroki Sato h...@freebsd.org wrote: I would like your comments on release notes for each release. Although I have been working on editing them for years, the workflow is still not optimal and sometimes delay of the preparation became an obstacle for release process. I would like to improve it, but before that I would like to know what are desired of the contents which people think. Release Notes is just listing the changes between the two releases. It includes user-visible change (bugfix and/or UI change), new functionality, and performance improvement. Minor changes such as one in kernel internal structure are omitted. I always try to keep these series of relnotes items are correct and reasonably comprehensive, but this lengthy list may be boring and technically-correct descriptions can be cryptic for average users. So, my questions are: 1. What do you think about current granularity of the relnotes items? Too detailed, good, or too rough? Currently, judgment of what is included or not is based on user-visible, new functionality, or performance improvement. Applicable changes are included as relnotes items even if the changes are small, I think the current granularity is good. 2. Do you want technical details? For example, just disk access performance was improved by 50% or Feature A has been added. This changes the old behavior because ..., and as a result, it improves disk access performance by 50%. I want technical details. You could compromise here by trying to always have the non-technical end result in the first sentence or so, and then go on with a more technical explanation. I would echo Mark Felder and say that if in doubt, more detail is better. 3. Is there missing information which should be in the relnotes? Probably there are some missing items for each release, but this question is one at some abstraction level. Link to commit log and diff, detailed description of major incompatible changes, and so on. I've not ever noticed any. Thanks! I'm on the SVN mailing lists so I tend to know about or be able to find changes I care about independent of the release notes. However if there is a mostly-automated way to link to specific commits in the release notes that could be valuable. Although the other release documentations---Errata, Installation Notes, ReadMe, and Hardware Notes---also need some improvements, please focus on Release Notes only. And you might think quality of English writing are not good, please leave that alone for now. I've never noticed any language problems in the release notes, and I tend to be a stickler. :) JN ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: request for your comments on release documentation
Mark Felder wrote: On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 12:49:21 -0500, Hiroki Sato h...@freebsd.org wrote: [...] 3. Is there missing information which should be in the relnotes? Probably there are some missing items for each release, but this question is one at some abstraction level. Link to commit log and diff, detailed description of major incompatible changes, and so on. I try to keep up with the development and changes in releases as best I can and I haven't noticed any glaring omissions over the last several releases. I think you're doing a fine job. Also, is there a reason this isn't a living document that can be updated as things get MFC'd to STABLE? It would help take load off your end and maybe speed up release once the freeze has happened and we begin the final grind through release candidates. It would be nice if all release related documents (relnotes, errata, hardware notes etc.) will be living after release (in online version) and not considered as set in stone. There are sometimes missing items which should be included online as soon as possible, but rarely are. For example, I found two issues with OpenSSH in 8.4 release. (bugs or features, or just incompatibilities with older versions) None of them is listed anywhere and I think it is really bad, because one issue can cause sshd not started after upgrade. So the online version of these docs should be living and updated as some issues and questions arises on the mailing lists and forums few days / weeks after release. On the other hand, FreeBSD has good quality of docs included Release Notes. (thank you for your work!) If there is some man power, some items can be more detailed with links to other online resources like FreeBSD wiki, but only for some important items. Miroslav Lachman ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: request for your comments on release documentation
On Jun 27, 2013, at 7:24 PM, Miroslav Lachman wrote: Mark Felder wrote: On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 12:49:21 -0500, Hiroki Sato h...@freebsd.org wrote: [...] 3. Is there missing information which should be in the relnotes? Probably there are some missing items for each release, but this question is one at some abstraction level. Link to commit log and diff, detailed description of major incompatible changes, and so on. I try to keep up with the development and changes in releases as best I can and I haven't noticed any glaring omissions over the last several releases. I think you're doing a fine job. Also, is there a reason this isn't a living document that can be updated as things get MFC'd to STABLE? It would help take load off your end and maybe speed up release once the freeze has happened and we begin the final grind through release candidates. It would be nice if all release related documents (relnotes, errata, hardware notes etc.) will be living after release (in online version) and not considered as set in stone. There are sometimes missing items which should be included online as soon as possible, but rarely are. For example, I found two issues with OpenSSH in 8.4 release. (bugs or features, or just incompatibilities with older versions) None of them is listed anywhere and I think it is really bad, because one issue can cause sshd not started after upgrade. So the online version of these docs should be living and updated as some issues and questions arises on the mailing lists and forums few days / weeks after release. Additionally, it would be nice if the documentation for beta and RCs was posted before the actual release as well. Just like the OS itself, docs can be beta and open for feedback from the community. It's also nice to know about changes before you upgrade a box for testing as well - for example, the jail changes and zfs version bump in 8.4 were something of a surprise for me (I follow -stable, but not much else). If the project wants people to test before release, having a list of changes, major and minor to focus on would probably net the project more useful feedback. I'm also all for the living document idea. It seems like the mailing lists always have a few issues that are documented nowhere else because they don't quite merit a ERRATA notice (eg: dhclient/fxp issue). Thanks, Charles On the other hand, FreeBSD has good quality of docs included Release Notes. (thank you for your work!) If there is some man power, some items can be more detailed with links to other online resources like FreeBSD wiki, but only for some important items. Miroslav Lachman ___ freebsd-sta...@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
request for your comments on release documentation
Hi, I would like your comments on release notes for each release. Although I have been working on editing them for years, the workflow is still not optimal and sometimes delay of the preparation became an obstacle for release process. I would like to improve it, but before that I would like to know what are desired of the contents which people think. Release Notes is just listing the changes between the two releases. It includes user-visible change (bugfix and/or UI change), new functionality, and performance improvement. Minor changes such as one in kernel internal structure are omitted. I always try to keep these series of relnotes items are correct and reasonably comprehensive, but this lengthy list may be boring and technically-correct descriptions can be cryptic for average users. So, my questions are: 1. What do you think about current granularity of the relnotes items? Too detailed, good, or too rough? Currently, judgment of what is included or not is based on user-visible, new functionality, or performance improvement. Applicable changes are included as relnotes items even if the changes are small, 2. Do you want technical details? For example, just disk access performance was improved by 50% or Feature A has been added. This changes the old behavior because ..., and as a result, it improves disk access performance by 50%. 3. Is there missing information which should be in the relnotes? Probably there are some missing items for each release, but this question is one at some abstraction level. Link to commit log and diff, detailed description of major incompatible changes, and so on. Although the other release documentations---Errata, Installation Notes, ReadMe, and Hardware Notes---also need some improvements, please focus on Release Notes only. And you might think quality of English writing are not good, please leave that alone for now. -- Hiroki pgp8TpJHirj07.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: request for your comments on release documentation
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 12:49:21 -0500, Hiroki Sato h...@freebsd.org wrote: So, my questions are: 1. What do you think about current granularity of the relnotes items? Too detailed, good, or too rough? Currently, judgment of what is included or not is based on user-visible, new functionality, or performance improvement. Applicable changes are included as relnotes items even if the changes are small, As a sysadmin I live and die by the granularity of release notes. If they weren't granular I'd end up having to read the commit logs and try to parse out changes myself. Sometimes changes aren't going to be obvious if you weren't aware of discussions on the -hackers, -current, or -stable lists. 2. Do you want technical details? For example, just disk access performance was improved by 50% or Feature A has been added. This changes the old behavior because ..., and as a result, it improves disk access performance by 50%. I'm sure if you're too terse like in your first example people will jump to conclusions and be angry when disk performance isn't improved 50% in every possible situation, as well as the project receiving bad press for being too deceiving. If you want to be terse perhaps Disk access improvements is sufficient, and use the second example if you want to be more explicit. 3. Is there missing information which should be in the relnotes? Probably there are some missing items for each release, but this question is one at some abstraction level. Link to commit log and diff, detailed description of major incompatible changes, and so on. I try to keep up with the development and changes in releases as best I can and I haven't noticed any glaring omissions over the last several releases. I think you're doing a fine job. Also, is there a reason this isn't a living document that can be updated as things get MFC'd to STABLE? It would help take load off your end and maybe speed up release once the freeze has happened and we begin the final grind through release candidates. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
