Hi,
I would like your comments on release notes for each release.
Although I have been working on editing them for years, the workflow
is still not optimal and sometimes delay of the preparation became an
obstacle for release process. I would like to improve it, but before
that I would like to know what are desired of the contents which
people think.
Release Notes is just listing the changes between the two releases.
It includes user-visible change (bugfix and/or UI change), new
functionality, and performance improvement. Minor changes such as
one in kernel internal structure are omitted. I always try to keep
these series of relnotes items are correct and reasonably
comprehensive, but this lengthy list may be boring and
technically-correct descriptions can be cryptic for average users.
So, my questions are:
1. What do you think about current granularity of the relnotes items?
Too detailed, good, or too rough? Currently, judgment of what is
included or not is based on user-visible, new functionality, or
performance improvement. Applicable changes are included as
relnotes items even if the changes are small,
2. Do you want technical details? For example, just "disk access
performance was improved by 50%" or "Feature A has been added.
This changes the old behavior because ..., and as a result, it
improves disk access performance by 50%".
3. Is there missing information which should be in the relnotes?
Probably there are some missing items for each release, but this
question is one at some abstraction level. Link to commit log and
diff, detailed description of major incompatible changes, and so
on.
Although the other release documentations---Errata, Installation
Notes, ReadMe, and Hardware Notes---also need some improvements,
please focus on Release Notes only. And you might think quality of
English writing are not good, please leave that alone for now.
-- Hiroki
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/attachments/20130613/5e0c7ea7/attachment.sig>
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 12:49:21 -0500, Hiroki Sato <hrs@freebsd.org> wrote:> So, my questions are: > 1. What do you think about current granularity of the relnotes items? > Too detailed, good, or too rough? Currently, judgment of what is > included or not is based on user-visible, new functionality, or > performance improvement. Applicable changes are included as > relnotes items even if the changes are small,As a sysadmin I live and die by the granularity of release notes. If they weren''t granular I''d end up having to read the commit logs and try to parse out changes myself. Sometimes changes aren''t going to be obvious if you weren''t aware of discussions on the -hackers, -current, or -stable lists.> 2. Do you want technical details? For example, just "disk access > performance was improved by 50%" or "Feature A has been added. > This changes the old behavior because ..., and as a result, it > improves disk access performance by 50%".I''m sure if you''re too terse like in your first example people will jump to conclusions and be angry when disk performance isn''t improved 50% in every possible situation, as well as the project receiving bad press for being too deceiving. If you want to be terse perhaps "Disk access improvements" is sufficient, and use the second example if you want to be more explicit.> 3. Is there missing information which should be in the relnotes? > Probably there are some missing items for each release, but this > question is one at some abstraction level. Link to commit log and > diff, detailed description of major incompatible changes, and so > on.I try to keep up with the development and changes in releases as best I can and I haven''t noticed any glaring omissions over the last several releases. I think you''re doing a fine job. Also, is there a reason this isn''t a "living" document that can be updated as things get MFC''d to STABLE? It would help take load off your end and maybe speed up release once the freeze has happened and we begin the final grind through release candidates. _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 12:49:21 -0500, Hiroki Sato <hrs at freebsd.org> wrote:> So, my questions are: > 1. What do you think about current granularity of the relnotes items? > Too detailed, good, or too rough? Currently, judgment of what is > included or not is based on user-visible, new functionality, or > performance improvement. Applicable changes are included as > relnotes items even if the changes are small,As a sysadmin I live and die by the granularity of release notes. If they weren't granular I'd end up having to read the commit logs and try to parse out changes myself. Sometimes changes aren't going to be obvious if you weren't aware of discussions on the -hackers, -current, or -stable lists.> 2. Do you want technical details? For example, just "disk access > performance was improved by 50%" or "Feature A has been added. > This changes the old behavior because ..., and as a result, it > improves disk access performance by 50%".I'm sure if you're too terse like in your first example people will jump to conclusions and be angry when disk performance isn't improved 50% in every possible situation, as well as the project receiving bad press for being too deceiving. If you want to be terse perhaps "Disk access improvements" is sufficient, and use the second example if you want to be more explicit.> 3. Is there missing information which should be in the relnotes? > Probably there are some missing items for each release, but this > question is one at some abstraction level. Link to commit log and > diff, detailed description of major incompatible changes, and so > on.I try to keep up with the development and changes in releases as best I can and I haven't noticed any glaring omissions over the last several releases. I think you're doing a fine job. Also, is there a reason this isn't a "living" document that can be updated as things get MFC'd to STABLE? It would help take load off your end and maybe speed up release once the freeze has happened and we begin the final grind through release candidates.
On Jun 12, 2013, at 11:49 AM, Hiroki Sato <hrs at FreeBSD.org> wrote:> I would like your comments on release notes for each release. > Although I have been working on editing them for years, the workflow > is still not optimal and sometimes delay of the preparation became an > obstacle for release process. I would like to improve it, but before > that I would like to know what are desired of the contents which > people think. > > Release Notes is just listing the changes between the two releases. > It includes user-visible change (bugfix and/or UI change), new > functionality, and performance improvement. Minor changes such as > one in kernel internal structure are omitted. I always try to keep > these series of relnotes items are correct and reasonably > comprehensive, but this lengthy list may be boring and > technically-correct descriptions can be cryptic for average users. > > So, my questions are: > > 1. What do you think about current granularity of the relnotes items? > Too detailed, good, or too rough? Currently, judgment of what is > included or not is based on user-visible, new functionality, or > performance improvement. Applicable changes are included as > relnotes items even if the changes are small,I think the current granularity is good.> 2. Do you want technical details? For example, just "disk access > performance was improved by 50%" or "Feature A has been added. > This changes the old behavior because ..., and as a result, it > improves disk access performance by 50%".I want technical details. You could compromise here by trying to always have the non-technical end result in the first sentence or so, and then go on with a more technical explanation. I would echo Mark Felder and say that if in doubt, more detail is better.> 3. Is there missing information which should be in the relnotes? > Probably there are some missing items for each release, but this > question is one at some abstraction level. Link to commit log and > diff, detailed description of major incompatible changes, and so > on.I've not ever noticed any. Thanks! I'm on the SVN mailing lists so I tend to know about or be able to find changes I care about independent of the release notes. However if there is a mostly-automated way to link to specific commits in the release notes that could be valuable.> Although the other release documentations---Errata, Installation > Notes, ReadMe, and Hardware Notes---also need some improvements, > please focus on Release Notes only. And you might think quality of > English writing are not good, please leave that alone for now.I've never noticed any language problems in the release notes, and I tend to be a stickler. :) JN