Bug 159178

Summary: 7.1 Packages moved to extras is incomplete
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Documentation Reporter: Bill Nottingham <notting>
Component: release-notesAssignee: Release Notes Tracker <relnotes>
Status: CLOSED UPSTREAM QA Contact: Tammy Fox <tammy.c.fox>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: develCC: kwade, rvokal, sopwith
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
URL: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/ReleaseNotes/Process
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-09-23 05:56:54 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 151189    

Description Bill Nottingham 2005-05-31 01:29:36 UTC 
Description of problem, bug, incorrect information, or enhancement request:

Off the top of my head, also:
- Maelstrom
- libtabe
- recode
- SDL_image
- SDL_mixer
- SDL_net
- xboard
- gnuchess
- balsa

A better rundown of this needs done.


Version of release notes this bug refers to:

Fedora Core 4 final release
Comment 1 Karsten Wade 2005-06-01 00:03:47 UTC 
Short term I will add these packages to the list.

I was not happy with the lists I did during testing, they were treediffs between
FC3-HEAD and FC4, and were entirely without context.  Rahul asked me to repeat
that for the release, but I don't know if it is useful or harmful to include.  I
 punted by taking the list that Rahul knew.

If it seems worthwhile still, I can include the list of packages that were in
FC3 but are not in FC4.  That doesn't say where they went to, if they got
renamed, etc.  Like I said, of dubious value.

Unfortunately there isn't a good method or process for capturing these changes.

I've had multiple discussions about this recently.  So far, the best option
seems to be something like this:

A. We need to help define what is worth release noting about a package change,
such as a rename, move to Extras, move to Core, etc.

B. When a package is changed:
  1. Developer could put a brief explanation as to what, why, where, etc. plus a
keyword such as RELNOTES in the commit log.
  2. That keyword triggers a message to relnotes@/mailing list/automatic
bugzilla entry (long shot idea).  Something so it doesn't get lost.
  3. Once a release we rally around the RELNOTES captures and make up a list,
then get it vetted during the testing notes.
  4. If a developer has a story to tell that is too long for the commit log, an
email can be sent to relnotes@/mailing list

Right now we just have relnotes, which is the owner of these
bugs.  We -might- want to make that a full mailing list such as
fedora-release-notes-list that can then be a bug owner, receiver of developer
tales, and discussion forum.
Comment 2 Karsten Wade 2006-09-23 05:56:54 UTC 
Fixed previously, closing old bug.