On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 6:14 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote:
> The 1.5.0 CHANGES does not include 1.4.Z changes. It should probably include the 1.4.0 changes. > > > On 2/19/14, 3:04 PM, Keith Turner wrote: > >> I think we should just take the release notes jira generates for X.Y.Z and >> prepend them to the CHANGES files with a header saying "Release Notes - >> Apache Accumulo - Version X.Y.Z". This is what was done for 1.4.[1,2,3,4] >> and 1.5.0 >> >> For example the following link will generate 1.4.4 release notes (can >> change it from HTML to text by pressing "Configure release notes"). >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa? >> version=12324151&styleName=Html&projectId=12312121&Create=Create >> >> >> On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 4:30 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> The CHANGES document that is included in an Accumulo release contains >>> some >>> set of changes from a previous release which presently contain the >>> following information: >>> >>> 1) Issue Type (Task, Bug, Feature, etc) >>> 2) Issue Number (ACCUMULO-1234) >>> 3) Issue Subject >>> >>> There have been various preferences expressed, primarily over IRC, on >>> which changes should be contained and how they should be formatted. The >>> largest consensus, and what I believe we should do, is as follows: >>> >>> Entries in a CHANGES file should contain issues, delimited by minor >>> version within the major version[1], grouped by issue type. The minor >>> version changes sorted be sorted in reverse order (e.g. 1.5.2, 1.5.1, >>> then >>> 1.5.0). Changes from the previous major version (e.g. 1.4.x) would *not* >>> be >>> included in this CHANGES file. >>> >>> Opinions? The results of this discussion will be documented on the >>> release-making page[2] of the website for future reference. >>> >>> - Josh >>> >>> [1] Major and minor version here is referred to as Y and Z of version >>> strings of the form: X.Y.Z (not as prescribed by semver, proper) >>> [2] http://accumulo.apache.org/releasing.html >>> >>> >>
