Max Kanat-Alexander Assignee
	Description • 20 years ago

2.19.3 needs release notes. They should include a large warning saying, "This
release will eat your babies for breakfast."

Hopefully the relnote keyword should help us with this.

	Max Kanat-Alexander Assignee
	Comment 1 • 20 years ago

Actually, what technically needs release notes is 2.20. We need to have at least
*something* by the time we hit rc1. 2.19.3 doesn't technically need release
notes, it just needs a little warning that this release is hazardous to your
health to be pasted all over the place.

	Max Kanat-Alexander Assignee
	Comment 2 • 20 years ago

OK, here's my first stab at the 2.20 Release Notes!

I've asked Colin to review them (since he's a docs guy), but really anybody can

take a stab at a review. Let me know if there's anything that I've left out, or

anything that should be different!

	Marc Schumann [:Wurblzap]
	Comment 3 • 20 years ago

Please add attachment 172267 [details] of bug 31314 to the release notes.

	Frédéric Buclin
	Comment 4 • 20 years ago

Comment on attachment 187498 [details] [diff] [review]
2.20 Release Notes, v1

>+Steps for Upgrading
>+-------------------
>+
>+1) View the Sanity Check (sanitycheck.cgi) page on your installation before
>+   upgrading.

I would explain why running sanitycheck.cgi before upgrading. Something like
"fix all warnings before upgrading or checksetup.pl may behave incorrectly".


>+Other Changes
>+-------------
>+
>+- The $::unconfirmedstate variable has been replaced by the actual string
>+  "UNCONFIRMED" everywhere in Bugzilla code.

Did you already mentioned in a previous release that %::FORM and %::MFORM are
dead? See bug 225818.


The patch looks good to me.

	:glob ✱
	Comment 5 • 20 years ago

+- You can tell Bugzilla to mark certain comments in a different
+  color by adding "&mark=1,2,3" to the end of the show_bug.cgi URL,
+  where "1,2,3" means "highlight comment 1, comment 2, and comment 3."

you can also specify a range .. &mark=1,2,5-7

	Dave Miller [:justdave]
	Comment 6 • 20 years ago

looks good to me, with the caveats mentioned by others already.

Is there a way to disable QA contact on the enter bug page?

	Max Kanat-Alexander Assignee
	Comment 7 • 20 years ago

(In reply to comment #3)
> Please add attachment 172267 [details] [edit] of bug 31314 to the release notes.

  OK, added a link to it in two places. (It's long, so it's easier just to link
to that attachment.)

(In reply to comment #4)
> I would explain why running sanitycheck.cgi before upgrading. Something like
> "fix all warnings before upgrading or checksetup.pl may behave incorrectly".

  OK, done. :-)

> Did you already mentioned in a previous release that %::FORM and %::MFORM are

> dead? See bug 225818.

  Ahh, awesome, right! :-) I've added a note about that, also.

(In reply to comment #5)
> you can also specify a range .. &mark=1,2,5-7

  Added. :-)

(In reply to comment #6)
> Is there a way to disable QA contact on the enter bug page?

  Not that I know of, other than disabling QA Contact or editing the templates.



  OK, so unless there are some other review comments, I figure that this is
pretty much the version that will go into 2.20rc1, yes?

	Colin Ogilvie [:cso]
	Comment 8 • 20 years ago

Comment on attachment 187588 [details] [diff] [review]
2.20 Release Notes, v2

Looks good to me, and given justdave said it's fine ;)

	Max Kanat-Alexander Assignee
	Comment 9 • 20 years ago

Checking in docs/rel_notes.txt;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/docs/rel_notes.txt,v  <--  rel_notes.txt
new revision: 1.32; previous revision: 1.31
done