Sean Busbey wrote:
On Wed, Jun 10, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: I think I was one who argued for this file in the past. Personally, I like having a static file that always follows the release. If I'm following the community (I see JIRA issues that are important and that are relevant), I find it much easier to `grep ACCUMULO-XYZ CHANGES` to know "do I have this fix". At the same time, I know the irritation behind creating the file (although I find it much less egregious than you do, Christopher). The issue to me is not creating the file (vim makes formatting easy), but making sure JIRA is actually accurate to how we want: is resolution correct, right fixVersion, etc. I'm guessing that it will be hard to actually get a response from those whom it actually benefits -- those who don't primarily operate online. I guess officially I'm 0 on it. I really don't think it's as terrible to maintain as you think it is, but it is unarguably more work for an RM to do. I think there are those who benefit from its existence, but I don't know how important it actually is (and I'm not one of those people) What if we added a list of all jiras to the end of the release notes and then included those in the distribution? -- Sean
That would work, but I'm not sure if it really addresses Christopher's initial irritation (maintaining the list of issues for a release).
It would also be a little more painful in practice since we tend to write the release notes after we have an RC staged (during the down-time).
