WIP release notes for 2.0

Review Request #4861 — Created Oct. 30, 2013 and submitted

Information

Review Board
master

Reviewers

WIP release notes for 2.0

This change adds release notes for almost everything that's gone into the master
branch so far. There are a few things that are intentionally left out because
they're not ready for user consumption.

Built releasenotes docs and checked it out.

Description From Last Updated

That will have to be updated now.

chipx86chipx86

Missing a trailing period.

chipx86chipx86

Hmm, you shouldn't need this format. I always do: * Blah blah blah. * Blah blah..

chipx86chipx86

"request"

chipx86chipx86

Best to do Markdown_ and then have a block below like: .. _Markdown: http://.... Easier to reuse, and no links …

chipx86chipx86

Should be consistent with using "Markdown".

chipx86chipx86

We should link to the page describing GitHub's extensions.

chipx86chipx86

Can we make this a little more explicit about how this was old behavior? Maybe just put "previously" in there.

chipx86chipx86

"thumbnails"

chipx86chipx86

Can you use :guilabel: for these?

chipx86chipx86

This made it into 1.7.16, and is documented there.

chipx86chipx86

Hmm, I believe this is in 1.7.5. Certainly, 1.7.x releases already do this.

chipx86chipx86

Can you link to this resource? Should be able to do: :ref:`Repository resource <webapi2.0-repository-resource>`

chipx86chipx86

Same with Repository List resource.

chipx86chipx86

Same with these resources.

chipx86chipx86

We'll need these filled in for the beta.

chipx86chipx86

Should link this resource.

chipx86chipx86

"JavaScript"

chipx86chipx86

These tags are on all pages we ship. I think it's confusing to have them in the release notes.

chipx86chipx86

Can we have literal quotes around that path?

chipx86chipx86

"one level of children" is a bit confusing to me. I don't remember what's in this hook, so I have …

chipx86chipx86

We should have a blurb about this for the beta.

chipx86chipx86

"a consolidated database representation" is kind of overly technical-sounding and doesn't mean anything to anybody who doesn't already know how …

chipx86chipx86

"have to make" or "has to make"? "have" sounds odd here.

chipx86chipx86

"JavaScript"

chipx86chipx86

We weren't using this jsmin. We were using a separate Python-based jsmin rewrite that did not include this term. The …

chipx86chipx86

Should use jsmin_ and have a .. _jsmin: http:// link below.

chipx86chipx86

"JavaScript"

chipx86chipx86

Should use UglifyJS_ and .. _UglifyJS: http://.

chipx86chipx86

Given the above, it's not worth talking about the license here. Better to say it offers improvements over the version …

chipx86chipx86

Can you use literal quotes for these fields?

chipx86chipx86

Here, too: issue_opened, issue_status, open, null.

chipx86chipx86

Should probably use :guilabel: here.

chipx86chipx86

"offter"?

chipx86chipx86

Should use literal quotes around /r/ here and in the description.

chipx86chipx86

We're missing at least two names (Po-Chien Lin and Alessandro Menti). Should go through and make sure everyone is listed.

chipx86chipx86

Let's not actually link this yet. I don't want to confuse people who view the release notes. We can just …

chipx86chipx86

Two blank lines.

chipx86chipx86

1.7.18.

chipx86chipx86

Now that 1.7.18 has this, we can remove it from these release notes.

chipx86chipx86
chipx86
  1. We should have a 2.0 beta 1 set of release notes that are ready for pushing this week. I made some notes about a couple things that still need to be filled in for this, and things that should be removed.

  2. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    That will have to be updated now.

  3. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     

    This isn't ready for alpha.

  4. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     

    Nor this.

  5. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    Missing a trailing period.

  6. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    Hmm, you shouldn't need this format. I always do:

    * Blah blah
      blah.
    
    * Blah blah..
    
  7. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    "request"

  8. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Best to do Markdown_ and then have a block below like:

    .. _Markdown: http://....
    

    Easier to reuse, and no links in the text.

  9. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Should be consistent with using "Markdown".

  10. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    We should link to the page describing GitHub's extensions.

    1. There's not really a great place to link. GitHub's page is 99% about features that we don't support (linking to github issues! linking to github users! ...). I think our own docs are a better overview.

    2. Yeah, that's fair.

  11. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    Can we make this a little more explicit about how this was old behavior? Maybe just put "previously" in there.

  12. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    "thumbnails"

  13. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    Can you use :guilabel: for these?

  14. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    This made it into 1.7.16, and is documented there.

  15. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Hmm, I believe this is in 1.7.5. Certainly, 1.7.x releases already do this.

  16. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Can you link to this resource? Should be able to do:

    :ref:`Repository resource <webapi2.0-repository-resource>`
    
    1. Why are these dropped?

    2. The highlighting goofed. Looks like there's a bug. That SHOULD have read: :ref:`Repository resource <webapi2.0-repository-resource>`

  17. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Same with Repository List resource.

  18. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Same with these resources.

  19. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    We'll need these filled in for the beta.

  20. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Should link this resource.

  21. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    "JavaScript"

  22. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    These tags are on all pages we ship. I think it's confusing to have them in the release notes.

  23. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Can we have literal quotes around that path?

  24. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    "one level of children" is a bit confusing to me. I don't remember what's in this hook, so I have no idea what this means.

  25. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    We should have a blurb about this for the beta.

  26. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    "a consolidated database representation" is kind of overly technical-sounding and doesn't mean anything to anybody who doesn't already know how this works. How about:

    Starting in Review Board 1.7, newly uploaded diffs of files would be stored in the database only once, saving storage space if that particular file was used repeatedly in parent diffs or remained unchanged across several iterations of a change.
    
  27. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    "have to make" or "has to make"? "have" sounds odd here.

    1. "have" is correct when "web browsers" is plural. That said, I'll try to make this less clunky.

  28. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    "JavaScript"

  29. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    We weren't using this jsmin. We were using a separate Python-based jsmin rewrite that did not include this term.

    The main reason we're leaving the Python jsmin is because it's largely unmaintained and does not offer some of the benefits of UglifyJS.

  30. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Should use jsmin_ and have a .. _jsmin: http:// link below.

  31. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    "JavaScript"

  32. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Should use UglifyJS_ and .. _UglifyJS: http://.

  33. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Given the above, it's not worth talking about the license here. Better to say it offers improvements over the version of jsmin we were using.

  34. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Can you use literal quotes for these fields?

  35. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    Here, too: issue_opened, issue_status, open, null.

  36. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Should probably use :guilabel: here.

  37. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    "offter"?

  38. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    Should use literal quotes around /r/ here and in the description.

  39. docs/releasenotes/2.0.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
    Show all issues

    We're missing at least two names (Po-Chien Lin and Alessandro Menti). Should go through and make sure everyone is listed.

    1. The rest of the list was created from git logs. It's just I missed these two because I dropped localization in one big blob.

  40. docs/releasenotes/index.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    Let's not actually link this yet. I don't want to confuse people who view the release notes. We can just keep it in the tree instead.

    1. Even if this is called 2.0-beta1 ?

    2. Totally fine with it as 2.0 beta 1. Just don't want to show a final 2.0 yet.

  41. docs/releasenotes/index.txt (Diff revision 1)
     
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    Two blank lines.

  42. 
      
david
chipx86
  1. 
      
  2. docs/releasenotes/2.0-beta-1.txt (Diff revision 2)
     
     
    Show all issues

    1.7.18.

  3. docs/releasenotes/2.0-beta-1.txt (Diff revision 2)
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
    Show all issues

    Now that 1.7.18 has this, we can remove it from these release notes.

  4. 
      
david
chipx86
  1. Ship It!
  2. 
      
david
Review request changed

Status: Closed (submitted)

Loading...