Closed Bug 432331 Opened 16 years ago Closed 16 years ago

Release Notes for Bugzilla 3.2

Categories

(Bugzilla :: Documentation, defect)

3.1.4
defect
Not set
blocker

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED
Bugzilla 3.2

People

(Reporter: mkanat, Assigned: mkanat)

References

Details

Attachments

(1 file, 4 obsolete files)

Bugzilla 3.2 needs release notes. This means finding all the bugs that currently have the "relnotes" keyword, and writing appropriate release notes for them, and also writing up the other sections as needed (see the Bugzilla 3.0 release notes).

Some bugs might have fallen through the cracks and not been marked as "relnote", so I also always like to check through the whole list of bonsai changes for the release to see if anything catches my eye, after I do all the "relnote" stuff.
Flags: blocking3.2+
I'm going to start on this.
Assignee: documentation → mkanat
Attached patch WIP (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Here's what I have so far--just the basic outline for what will be the 3.2 release notes.

What's important that I learned here is that when you add a new version, you have to copy the raw HTML of the "requirements" tables and paste them into the section for the previous release notes, because they're getting auto-generated and aren't correct anymore for the modern release. You also have to update the BLOCK db_req section to generate the right <a name> tag.
Attached patch WIP 2 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Okay, here's some more.
Attachment #327350 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attached patch WIP 3 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
This contains relnotes for all the new features, although I haven't checked this file at all yet to see if it works or if there are typos or anything.
Attachment #327354 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Blocks: 442993
Comment on attachment 327561 [details] [diff] [review]
WIP 3

>Index: editworkflow.cgi
>Index: template/en/default/admin/workflow/edit.html.tmpl

Please remove unrelated files from the patch. :)
Attached patch v1 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Okay, I've spell-checked and tested this, and updated it to add some last-minute additions.
Attachment #327561 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #332469 - Flags: review?
Comment on attachment 332469 [details] [diff] [review]
v1

>+  <li><a href="#v32_feat_ui">Major UI Improvements</a></li>

>+<h3><a name="v32_feat_status"></a>Major UI Improvements</h3>

The name of the anchor must be "v32_feat_ui".


>+  <li><strong>[% terms.Bugs %]</strong>: The [% terms.bug %] view now 
>+    contains some <a href="http://microformats.org/about/">Microformats</a>,
>+    most notably for users' names and email addreses.</li>

s/addreses/addresses/


>+  <li><strong>Search</strong>: You can now reverse the sort of 
>+    [+% terms.abug %] list by clicking on a column header again.</li>

Must be [%+ terms.abug %], else it's displayed as-is.


>+  <li>You can now use "Change Several [% terms.Bugs %] At Once" if you have
>+    <kbd>editbugs</kbd> permissions for any of the [% terms.bugs %]
>+    in the list.</li>

To make sure I understand correctly, "any of the bugs" as in "all the bugs"? Because if there is at least one bug for which you don't have editbugs privs, then you cannot do mass-changes.


>+  <li>Many pages (paricularly administrative pages) now contain links to

s/paricularly/particularly/


>+  <li>New WebService functions:
>+    <a href="[% docs_urlbase FILTER html %]api/Bugzilla/WebService/Bug.html#add_comment">B<!-- -->ug.add_comment</a>

This is unfortunate, but the URL is Bug.html#add_comment_EXPERIMENTAL. No idea why EXPERIMENTAL is appended to the method name.


>+    and <a href="[% docs_urlbase FILTER html %]api/Bugzilla/WebService/Bugzilla.html#extensions">Bugzilla.extensions</a>.</li>

Same problem here: The URL is Bugzilla.html#extensions_EXPERIMENTAL.


>+  <li>The documentation can now be localized--in other words, you can have
>+    documentation installed for multiple languages at once and
>+    [% terms.Bugzilla %] will link to the correct language in its internal
>+    documentation links.</li>

Must be [%+ terms.Bugzilla %]


>+  <li>The <code>[&#37;# version = 1.0 &#37;] comment at the top of every
>+    template file has been removed, and <kbd>runtests.pl</kbd> will now
>+    throw a warning if it finds it in any file.</li>

No, runtests.pl won't check this at all. We really don't care if it's present or not.


>+<h3><a name="v30_req_perl"></a>Perl</h3>
>+
>+<ul>
>+  <li>Perl <span class="req_new">v<strong>5.8.0</strong></span> (non-Windows 
>+    platforms)</li>
>+
>+  <li>Perl v<strong>5.8.1</strong> (Windows platforms)</li>
>+</ul>

This code is duplicated, for 3.0.


>+  <tr>
>+    <td>Email::MIME</td> 
>+    <td>1.861</td>
>+  </tr>

Email::MIME was not listed by checksetup.pl in 3.0, but has been added later in 3.0.x. Not sure how you want to display this (maybe with an asterisk?).


>+  <tr>
>+    <td class="req_new">Email::MIME::Modifier</td> 
>+    <td class="req_new">1.442</td>
>+  </tr>
>+</table>

Same comment here.


Otherwise looks great!
Attachment #332469 - Flags: review? → review-
(In reply to comment #7)
> To make sure I understand correctly, "any of the bugs" as in "all the bugs"?
> Because if there is at least one bug for which you don't have editbugs privs,
> then you cannot do mass-changes.

  I thought we changed it so that if you have product-specific editbugs, you can edit just the bugs that you can edit? Otherwise that's more of a bug fix than a feature.

> This is unfortunate, but the URL is Bug.html#add_comment_EXPERIMENTAL. No idea
> why EXPERIMENTAL is appended to the method name.

  Because it's part of the =item. We should probably move those below the method name.

> Email::MIME was not listed by checksetup.pl in 3.0, but has been added later in
> 3.0.x. Not sure how you want to display this (maybe with an asterisk?).

  Well, it always required it. You're right that the explicit version check was added later. I'm not worried about it. We'll just say that the 3.2 requirements are new since 3.0.5 or something like that.

> Otherwise looks great!

  Thanks!
Attached patch v2Splinter Review
Okay, fixed everything that I didn't respond to. :-)
Attachment #332469 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #332595 - Flags: review?
Comment on attachment 332595 [details] [diff] [review]
v2

>+  <li><strong>[% terms.Bugs %]</strong>: The [% terms.bug %] view now 
>+    contains some <a href="http://microformats.org/about/">Microformats</a>,
>+    most notably for users' names and email addreses.</li>

s/addreses/addresses/


>+  <li>New WebService functions:
>+    <a href="[% docs_urlbase FILTER html %]api/Bugzilla/WebService/Bug.html#add_comment">B<!-- -->ug.add_comment</a>
>+    and <a href="[% docs_urlbase FILTER html %]api/Bugzilla/WebService/Bugzilla.html#extensions">Bugzilla.extensions</a>.</li>

You forgot to fix these URLs, see my previous review comment.


Otherwise looks good. r=LpSolit with these comments addressed.
Attachment #332595 - Flags: review? → review+
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Flags: approval3.2+
Flags: approval+
tip:

Checking in template/en/default/pages/release-notes.html.tmpl;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/pages/release-notes.html.tmpl,v  <--  release-notes.html.tmpl
new revision: 1.18; previous revision: 1.17
done

3.2 branch:

Checking in template/en/default/pages/release-notes.html.tmpl;
/cvsroot/mozilla/webtools/bugzilla/template/en/default/pages/release-notes.html.tmpl,v  <--  release-notes.html.tmpl
new revision: 1.17.2.1; previous revision: 1.17
done
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 16 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.