Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

Bug 540212

Summary:	Release Noted section of feature page no where to be found in the Release Notes
Product:	[Retired] Fedora Documentation	Reporter:	Hans de Goede <hdegoede>
Component:	release-notes	Assignee:	John J. McDonough <wb8rcr>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:	Karsten Wade <kwade>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	devel	CC:	wb8rcr
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	Reopened
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2010-10-29 11:05:05 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:

Description Hans de Goede 2009-11-22 19:05:36 UTC

Description of problem:
While triaging a bug I wanted to point a user to the release note about Intel BIOS RAID support now using mdraid instead of dmraid:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Anaconda/Features/MDRaid#Release_Notes

But this is no were to be found in the release notes! I've no idea
who is to blame here, but the whole Feature process has definitely
failed here, since the Feature page template has a release note section,
and one gets pinged to update this even, I sort of assumed some one would
pick up the text from the Feature pages and put this in the
release notes. But this seems to not have happened.

Note that I also send a mail about to the documentation list about
an update to:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Anaconda/Features/MDRaid#Release_Notes

Before F-12 shipped with a request to include the updated text in the release
note, but apparently that didn't wake up anyone either.

Regards,

Hans

Comment 1 John J. McDonough 2010-02-04 16:19:23 UTC

This was deliberately omitted.  With Fedora 12, we tried to focus only on major changes.  Of course, what constitutes major depends on the audience.  This particular item was viewed as one affecting a small number of users.

The All Changes section was added to provide users with links to all the changes.  Of course, no matter who you are, this doesn't seem fair, because no matter who you are, at least one of your "important" changes is only mentioned as a version change in a table.  But every one of those roughly 8000 changes is important to someone.  So we just had to take a stab at what constituted a "major" change and which changes were more esoteric.

Comment 2 Hans de Goede 2010-02-04 18:41:35 UTC

<ugh>

Not a major change ? The way how peoples harddisks (for a certain, definitely not small subset of systems) got accessed changed completely. I've got a lot of negative feedback from users who were very surprised by this in their eyes unannounced change. People tend to get very nervous when you change the way their disks are accessed as they tend to care about the data on those disks.

People not following the suggested release note could end up with a non booting system after upgrade, how is that anything but major ???

This sucks, sorry I have no other words for this, this just sucks. The process behind this decision which was made here is completely broken. At the very least the process should be fixed, so that the feature owner gets a personal mail telling him that the Release Note for his feature has been omitted.