First rev of 10.14.1 release notes

[Rick Hillegas <ri...@gmail.com>]

I think that we are still on track to vet a 10.14.1 release candidate, 
following the schedule laid out at 
https://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/DerbyTenFourteenOneRelease. The current 
release notes can be found at 
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/db/derby/code/trunk/RELEASE-NOTES.html?view=co 
Don't be put off by the release number at the top of the page 
(10.14.0.0). That number will change after we actually cut the 10.14 
branch. Please let me know how I can improve these release notes.

As always, vetting will go more smoothly if people can devote some time 
over the next two weeks to buddy-testing the features and fixes in the 
development trunk.

Please let the community know if you need more time to wrap up your 
contributions to this release.

Thanks,
-Rick

Re: First rev of 10.14.1 release notes

[Rick Hillegas <ri...@gmail.com>]

On 9/4/17 5:46 PM, Bryan Pendleton wrote:
>
>     Thanks for raising this issue. Here's a thought: On the download
>     page, instead of dividing releases into the "Latest Official
>     Releases" and "Archived Official Releases" blocks, we could divide
>     the releases into blocks identified by the oldest JVM which
>     supports them.
>
>
>
> I like this approach.  I think (a) that's the best place to try to 
> communicate this information, and (b) there will be a substantial 
> period of time where visitors to that page will be looking for "the 
> version of Derby that supports Java N", where N is (8,9).
>
> Your approach seems to solve that problem nicely.
>
> bryan
>
Thanks for that feedback, Bryan. I have re-organized the download page 
in order to highlight the correspondence between JDK and Derby versions.

Thanks,

-Rick

Re: First rev of 10.14.1 release notes

[Bryan Pendleton <bp...@gmail.com>]

>
> Thanks for raising this issue. Here's a thought: On the download page,
> instead of dividing releases into the "Latest Official Releases" and
> "Archived Official Releases" blocks, we could divide the releases into
> blocks identified by the oldest JVM which supports them.
>
>
>
I like this approach.  I think (a) that's the best place to try to
communicate this information, and (b) there will be a substantial period of
time where visitors to that page will be looking for "the version of Derby
that supports Java N", where N is (8,9).

Your approach seems to solve that problem nicely.

bryan

Re: First rev of 10.14.1 release notes

[Rick Hillegas <ri...@gmail.com>]

On 9/3/17 10:11 AM, Bryan Pendleton wrote:
> The release notes look great, Rick, thanks for moving this along.
>
> And the schedule is still OK for me, too.
>
> Regarding the release notes, I wonder if we've called enough attention 
> to the Java 8 notification at the end of the "Overview" section.
>
> It seems clear enough, I'm just wondering if there's some way we can 
> make it "jump out" at the reader.
>
> Whatever we decide, we should probably also make sure that this 
> notification is visible in other places beyond the release notes, 
> since (I anticipate that) once Java 9 is available, we'll have a 
> certain amount of routine confusion about which release is for Java 8, 
> and which for Java 9.
Thanks for raising this issue. Here's a thought: On the download page, 
instead of dividing releases into the "Latest Official Releases" and 
"Archived Official Releases" blocks, we could divide the releases into 
blocks identified by the oldest JVM which supports them.

What are your thoughts?

Thanks,
-Rick
>
> thanks,
>
> bryan
>

Re: First rev of 10.14.1 release notes

[Bryan Pendleton <bp...@gmail.com>]

The release notes look great, Rick, thanks for moving this along.

And the schedule is still OK for me, too.

Regarding the release notes, I wonder if we've called enough attention to
the Java 8 notification at the end of the "Overview" section.

It seems clear enough, I'm just wondering if there's some way we can make
it "jump out" at the reader.

Whatever we decide, we should probably also make sure that this
notification is visible in other places beyond the release notes, since (I
anticipate that) once Java 9 is available, we'll have a certain amount of
routine confusion about which release is for Java 8, and which for Java 9.

thanks,

bryan