Thanks your responses! Seems like all of you prefer to have both trivial
and non-trivial updates in CHANGES.txt. I'm going to keep that in mind,
but will continue to omit them for documentation edits.
On 18.07.2017 23:49, kurt greaves wrote:
> I agree that all patches should be added to changes.t
I agree that all patches should be added to changes.txt, just to rule out
any ambiguities. When people look at Changes.txt it's usually to find
something specific, not to browse the list of changes. Anything significant
should make it into news.txt, which is more appropriate for users.
changes.txt
@cassandra.apache.org
Subject: Re: CHANGES.txt
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Stefan Podkowinski wrote:
> Has there been any consensus in the past about what goes into
> CHANGES.txt and what not? My naive assumption was that the intended
> audience for the file are users who want to know about change
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Stefan Podkowinski wrote:
> Has there been any consensus in the past about what goes into
> CHANGES.txt and what not? My naive assumption was that the intended
> audience for the file are users who want to know about changes between
> new releases. Having that in m
