Hi David,

Thank you for your detailed email.

I’ll try to cleanup the JIRA issues based on your comments. 

Cheers,
Roberto

> On 29 Aug 2018, at 04:21, David Blevins <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> First, huge thank you for putting effort into ensuring the release notes are 
> clear!  It's an under appreciated and usually thankless job.  However, 
> communicating change on a new major version is critical and you just get one 
> chance to build excitement.
> 
> 
>> On Aug 28, 2018, at 9:02 AM, Roberto Cortez <[email protected]> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi, 
>> 
>> I’m trying to compile a list of things regarding the TomEE 8 Release. Right 
>> now, this is our preview for the Release Notes from JIRA:
>> 
>> Bug
> 
> My memory is perhaps off, but I thought bugs came after New Features and 
> Improvements on the generated release notes.  If they haven't in the past, we 
> should likely do that for this one.
> 
>>      • [TOMEE-2206] - Support for Enum injection in Microprofile JWT
> 
> I think this is an improvement vs bug. Perhaps even moved to tasks.
> 
> It's always been a stance of the project that unreleased features can't have 
> bugs.  The intent of Bug is to communicate "you may have encountered this in 
> a previous release and it is now fixed."  We want user's to be able to rely 
> on this meaning.
> 
> It's natural to want to do it, but here's how I was able to convince myself 
> it wasn't the right thing.  This usage of "bug" essentially means, "We 
> noticed we weren't quite as done as we thought after the first commit of this 
> feature.  It's never been released so you could never have encountered it in 
> production and if you are alarmed by it or hopeful it solves a problem you 
> had, that'd be silly of you.  It's just an ignorable note that we had to 
> continue working on the feature longer than we thought, considerately mixed 
> in with critical things that affect your daily life."
> 
> Once that thought entered my brain, it started changing neural pathways and 
> I've been unable to get rid of it.
> 
> Joking aside, the result for users is that our release notes start to become 
> a puzzle of potential misinformation.
> 
>> New Feature
>>      • [TOMEE-2209] - MicroProfile 1.2 Support
>>      • [TOMEE-2210] - MicroProfile 1.3 Support
>>      • [TOMEE-2211] - MicroProfile 1.2 Support - Configuration 1.1
>>      • [TOMEE-2212] - MicroProfile 1.2 Support - Fault Tolerance 1.0
>>      • [TOMEE-2213] - MicroProfile 1.2 Support - JWT Propagation 1.0
>>      • [TOMEE-2214] - MicroProfile 1.2 Support - Health Check 1.0
>>      • [TOMEE-2215] - MicroProfile 1.2 Support - Metrics 1.0
>>      • [TOMEE-2216] - MicroProfile 1.3 Support - Config 1.2
>>      • [TOMEE-2217] - MicroProfile 1.3 Support - Metrics 1.1
>>      • [TOMEE-2218] - MicroProfile 1.3 Support - Rest Client 1.0
>>      • [TOMEE-2219] - MicroProfile 1.3 Support - Open API 1.0
> 
> We should yank the duplicate entries and just talk net-net.  People can 
> assume Configuration 1.2 also includes 1.1 and 1.0.  If we completely 
> implement MicroProfile 1.3, we can say that and not mention 1.2.  If we do 
> not fully implement MicroProfile 1.3, the above didn't help me understand the 
> status.
> 
> On the individual MicroProfile specifications, I would not refer to them as 
> "MicroProfile 1.3 Support - Config 1.2", but simply "MicroProfile 
> Configuration 1.2"
> 
> - It will search better in Google
> 
> - Some specs like Metrics 1.0 are in MP 1.2 and 1.3.  Showing it as "MP 1.2" 
> could mean it was introduced in 1.2 and hasn't changed in 1.3.  It could mean 
> Metrics is at 1.1 in MP 1.3, but we don't implement it yet.  It could mean 
> Metrics was removed entirely in MP 1.3 so we only mention it as a MP 1.2 
> feature.  Unless you know enough not to need the release notes, you won't 
> know which.
> 
> You're right in that we need a complete list of other new features, 
> particularly our complete Java EE 8 status has to be listed here as well.
> 
>> Improvement
>>      • [TOMEE-2195] - Compile Error in 
>> /src/main/java/org/apache/openejb/config/AnnotationDeployer
> 
> We should probably move that one to tasks.
> 
>>      • [TOMEE-2196] - keyStoreFile Property is Empty in Embedded Container
>>      • [TOMEE-2221] - Use a Jsonb aware JAX-RS Provider
>>      • [TOMEE-2222] - Enable create-tables for EclipseLink in Moviefun 
>> example
>>      • [TOMEE-2224] - update to apache-parent-21 for sha512
> 
> Picky I know, but we should change the case on this description to be 
> consistent.  Also, it should be in upgrades technically.
> 
>> Task
>>      • [TOMEE-2159] - TomEE8: JSF 2.3
>>      • [TOMEE-2160] - TomEE8: Servlet 4.0
> 
> These two should go to new features. We should also yank the "TomEE8:" prefix.
> 
>>      • [TOMEE-2174] - Nested parameters prevent EJB interceptor matching
> 
> This sounds like it should go to bug.
> 
>> Dependency upgrade
>>      • [TOMEE-2171] - Upgrade to ActiveMQ 5.15.3
>>      • [TOMEE-2178] - TomEE8: Update to MyFaces 2.3.0 release
>>      • [TOMEE-2179] - tomcat 9.0.8
>>      • [TOMEE-2180] - johnzon 1.1.7
>>      • [TOMEE-2184] - MyFaces 2.3.1
>>      • [TOMEE-2186] - Upgrade CXF to 3.2.4
>>      • [TOMEE-2187] - Upgrade to XBean 4.9
>>      • [TOMEE-2207] - Update Bouncy Castle to 1.60
> 
> We should update all the titles to be consistent in use (or non use) of 
> "Upgrade" and how they are phrased.  Small detail, but shows we care.
> 
>> Additionally, we have the following issue list associated to TomEE 8, that 
>> we need to update or decide if we need to do something with them for this 
>> release:
>>      • [TOMEE-2115] - TomEE-8 work
> 
> Commits with this JIRA might help us find work that should get its own JIRA 
> and be mentioned in the release notes.  This item might possibly be a good 
> candidate to retitle "Java EE 8 Support"
> 
>>      • [TOMEE-2116] - Create javaee-api-8.0.0
> 
> Good one for the notes, but cleaned up.
> 
>>      • [TOMEE-2117] - Rework ProcessObserverMethod integration
>>      • [TOMEE-2139] - org.apache.tomee.jul.handler.rotating.ArchivingTest 
>> broken in 2nd iteration
>>      • [TOMEE-2140] - retire or fix arquillian-jpa example
> 
> We should figure out which way we went on this and update the title.
> 
>>      • [TOMEE-2169] - Interceptor Bean injection does not work for EJBs
> 
> This sounds like a bug.
> 
>>      • [TOMEE-2185] - Add MP-JWT support
> 
> We should yank the duplicates like "Add MP-JWT support" and mark them 
> duplicates (or mark the newly created TOMEE-2213 as a duplicate of 
> TOMEE-2185, then update the title of TOMEE-2185).
> 
>>      • [TOMEE-2227] - upgrade CXF to 3.2.6 and tomcat to 9.0.11
> 
> We need to update the respective "Upgrade" issues and mark this as duplicate. 
>  We should of course check the actual version of Tomcat and CXF to ensure 
> it's accurate.  We've got on saying Tomcat 9.0.8 and other saying 9.0.11.  
> Let's hope it's 9.0.11 :)
> 
>>      • [TOMEE-2197] - openejb.xml <Deployments jar="..."/> does not work
> 
> 
> This sounds like a bug and it sounds like an overstated bug that needs more 
> context on the subject.
> 
>> Also, I guess that a lot of work was done without creating issues, so 
>> everything that was done is not completely reflected in this list. We may 
>> need to create some issues for that.
> 
> For a bit I attempted to be extremely diligent with making release note 
> entries for old commits.  At one point I even hacked up a bit of code to help 
> me review each individual commit.
> 
> - 
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomee/sandbox/release-tools/src/main/java/org/apache/openejb/tools/release/cmd/ReviewCommits.java
> 
> It was basically a shell that pulled all the svn commit logs in xml format 
> and then looped you over each one and you could hit the V, A, N, or C keys to 
> View the jira, Associate the commit with a jira, skip to the Next commit, or 
> Create a jira for the commit and associate it.
> 
> I don't know what the heck I was on. :)  You definitely do not have to do 
> that.
> 
> 
> -David
> 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to