We should use authors of the issue/PR/idea. After the release we can ask WHY (practical goals) he wanted the feature more than how. The question for "HOW" has to be placed very early during the review, but too late after the PR has been merged. I expect that the reviewer developer has checked all the code, so there would not be questions about *how* it is done. If the reviewer does not understand the code and he admits the change, then it is question for him whenever a new trouble happens. So this is my opinion - listing the author(s) of the idea in every issue/PR.
On Fri, Aug 30, 2019 at 10:40 PM Robert Scholte <rfscho...@apache.org> wrote: > Not sure if the reader of the release notes is helped with a long list of > reporters and contributers per issue. > I would expect that only a list of (unique) names is good enough. > > If there is someone that deserves extra credits, I'd say it is Stefan > Oehme for diving into the code, looking for memory leaks AND providing > patches to solve it. > > thanks for pushing this release! > Robert > > On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 22:02:31 +0200, Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > Hi all, > > I have sent a draft of the release notes for 3.6.2 > > > > this is the PR > > https://github.com/apache/maven-site/pull/99/files > > > > Feel free to add comments or push fixes directly to the branch. > > > > It still lacks a bit of formatting, but the content is ready > > > > Cheers > > Enrico > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
