Philippe Cloutier created LOG4J2-3651:
-----------------------------------------
Summary: 2.20.0 release notes change pattern confused ("for")
Key: LOG4J2-3651
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LOG4J2-3651
Project: Log4j 2
Issue Type: Bug
Components: Documentation
Affects Versions: 2.20.0
Reporter: Philippe Cloutier
[The Log4j 2.20.0 release
notes|https://logging.apache.org/log4j/2.x/release-notes/2.20.0.html] contain
numerous items in the form:
{quote}_Description_ ({*}for{*} _ID_ by {_}authors{_})
{quote}
In most cases, this format makes sense, since the change was performed _for_
solving the issue reported in the ticket mentioned. For example, "Removes
internal field that leaked into public API. (for LOG4J2-3615 by Piotr P.
Karwasz)" indicates that a field was removed _for_ solving LOG4J2-3615.
For changes which are not motivated by a report though, the items refer to a
merge request instead of a ticket, as in the following example:
??Simplify site generation (for 1166 by Volkan Yazıcı)??
These items are confusing since the link brings to a description of the change
rather than to a description of the problem.
Items which refer to merge requests should use an appropriate pattern, such as:
{quote}_Description_ ({*}via{*} _ID_ by {_}authors{_})
{quote}
By the way:
* {color:#404040}"Removes internal field that leaked into public API{color}"
should not be in the _Added_ section.
* Version 2.20.0 is still listed as unreleased in this ITS.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
