Am 07/13/2013 01:28 AM, schrieb Rob Weir:
On Fri, Jul 12, 2013 at 4:44 PM, Marcus (OOo)<marcus.m...@wtnet.de> wrote:
Am 07/12/2013 09:17 PM, schrieb Rob Weir:
On Jul 12, 2013, at 2:26 PM, "Marcus (OOo)"<marcus.m...@wtnet.de> wrote:
Am 07/12/2013 07:18 PM, schrieb janI:
On 12 July 2013 18:49, Rob Weir<robw...@apache.org> wrote:
In the past we drafted release notes on the wiki, and then moved them
to a location on the website. I'd like to challenge our thinking on
this.
Wouldn't it be useful to keep the release notes as a "live" document
on the wiki, so we can easily update it with additional information on
known issues as they are found, especially after release?
I see your point, however I disagree.
I think the release doc. for 4.0 is part of the release and should be
frozen in svn like all other release artifacts. This is done by having
it
as a static web page.
I support the doubts of Jan.
The release notes should be seen as an artifact from a release as they
describe this. We can also go that far that we write down the SVN revision
number into the release notes. Then they are really tied strictly to this
release and nothing else.
And I did not mean to suggest anything else. The wiki page would be
tied to a specific version of AOO, a different page for each version.
But it would be updated to reflect the latest info, especially in the
"known problems" section.
You suggested to put the release notes *and* latest information into the
Wiki, not only the last.
Specifically, I'm proposing that these are the same thing. Remember,
we already have a section in the release notes called "known issues".
It sounds like you want that to be a snapshot of what was known at a
fixed point in time, and then force the user to go to a different page
to find timely information. Why make them do that?
Of course not. I wrote that the normal release notes should go to the
webpage and the section(s) that can change (e.g., known issues) can go
to the Wiki.
We can then have a "latest information", which are live in wiki.
What about to put a link like this at the top of the release notes to
give it more visible attention:
Text: "For the latest information about Apache OpenOffice 4.0 see
this related Wiki page."
Link: http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/AOO400_Lastest_Info
Look at it from the perspective of the user. They want one place to go
for relevant info related to the release and problems they might
encounter. They don't want to hunt around for "old" versus "new" info.
Those distinctions are not relevant to a new user.
Look from the perspective of a forum user. They ask "Why does function X not
work on OS Y?" and they could be pointed to the Wiki page with the "Known
Issues" part, without the need to read all the oher stuff.
If the user was not able to find a solution themselves then we have
already failed. The forums are not a solution for 50 million users.
We still need to make an effort to provide relevant information to the
user *at the time they download AOO*.
Yes, up to then we have to point them after the download / install to
the information.
A specific example. AOO 3.4.0 had a problem with migration extensions
which caused a crash that lead to a huge number of reports to the
forums and the mailing list and bugzilla. We're still cleaning up the
mess. We get many reports on this on Facebook as well. Doesn't it
make sense for the user to know about this information, and the easy
workaround, when they download AOO initially? Why make them hunt for
the info?
There is no hunt when there is a clear way to find the information.
When we put the link on some prominent places then the Google index can
help us. The user searches for "Known issues", "major problems" or what
ever and can find the Wiki page realtiviley easily.
For example, imagine Windows 8.1 comes out and causes a problem with
AOO4, but there is a good workaround that could save the user much
frustration. But the release notes don't mention this. They just say
Windows 8 is tested. This is not very helpful.
Great, just point them to the Wiki page.
Again, I'm trying to encourage self-service remedies for millions of
users. Once they come here to ask a question they are already
frustrated and we have already failed them.
When we have millions of users with problems we have a totally different
problem. ;-)
Then new and important / noteable changes can be documented in the (more
easily accessible) Wiki.
My proposal was to handle this by keeping the release notes on a wiki
page so such changes are seen by users with the least effort for them
and us.
I still would like to see the (real) release notes in SVN control and
finally on a webpage. And the things that occur suddenly until the next
release can go into the Wiki.
We are not that far away from each others opinion. ;-)
Perhaps, but I would like you to consider again this from the user's
perspective and what would make it easiest for them to resolve issues
without flooding our mailing lists for questions that we already know
about.
I still think that a "splitted" way would be the best.
A)
The user downloads AOO and is reading the release notes (BTW, how does
he knows that these exist?), clicks on the link and can see all known
issues up to the last edit.
B)
The user has already a problem with AOO and can be pointed (forum, user
list, Google search, ...) to the known issues list, without the need to
read all the othert stuff of the release notes that he is not
interesting in.
That's the way I see the flow.
Marcus
Remember, even if the issue is not caused by AOO code, a new upgrade
to a dependent operating system or other 3rd party application can
cause new issues to appear at any time. So keeping the release notes
updated is important.
This issue is highly caused by AOO code, remember the release code is
tested with a given set of third party libraries and given versions of
the
operating systems.
Release notes reflect the environment tested for the 4.0 release,
everything that comes later should either be kept in a separate document
or
postponed to a new release.
Do we lose anything if we do this? For example, is there a concern
that the wiki can not handle the load?
Wiki can handle the load (it must because a lot of people will search
for
info).
Yes we loose trackability. Release notes is in svn (in my opinion).
Remember in wiki anybody can change, so if person X test AOO on platform
Y
should he/she then just update the release documentation, I hope not.
But again, your idea of a live document is good, I just see it as a
second
document (similar to what a lot of companies does).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
