I will remove DUCC description from the README. As far as the RELEASE_NOTES for DUCC, I modeled it on the UIMA RELEASE_NOTES, which does have - How to Get Involved - How to Report Issues
Should I move these two to README? Or should I keep those in RELEASE_NOTES to keep it consistent with UIMA? With respect to Known Limitations, I will move this to DUCCs RELEASE_NOTES I would propose to defer handling of a version in both the README and RELEASE_NOTES till the next release of DUCC. On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 12:29 PM, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote: > The criterion of where things go - the README or the RELEASE_NOTES - is > not clear. > > Here are some thoughts on this. > The README should be general and important information, perhaps not > changing too > much from release to release. > > It's where new users are likely to read (more likely than they would be to > read > the RELEASE_NOTES, I think). > > To make it more likely it is "absorbed" by new users, it's important to > limit > this to *important* things. > > The RELEASE-NOTES is for things that are particular to a release. It can > hyperlink to the README. > > Currently, DUCC's README and RELEASE-NOTES both have identical paragraphs > describing what DUCC is. While this is OK, it might be easier to maintain > going > forward if this was just in the README. > > The RELEASE_NOTES have some sections it seems to me belong in the readme: > how > to get involved, and how to report issues. > > Both of these files have a section which is the high level, more > reader-friendly (than the Jira issues list) summary of major changes. One > calls > it "major changes", the other "what's new in release x.y.z". The one in > the > RELEASE_NOTES currently is empty except for a hyperlink to the README one. > > This summary of changes section seems to belong to RELEASE_NOTES, unless > - they describe changes that cover multiple releases > - they're *important* and we want to increase the likelyhood of a > downloader > reading them > > Known problems and limitations: this too seems to belong to > RELEASE_NOTES, unless > - they describe problems/limitations that cover multiple releases > - they're *important* and we want to increase the likelyhood of a > downloader > reading them > > Since both of these files have version #s, it would be good to automate the > insertion of the correct version # into them :-). > > -Marshall >
