Bug #11372

Write release notes for 2.6

Added by sajolida 2016-04-25 05:24:18 . Updated 2016-09-20 16:47:50 .

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Assignee:
Category:
Target version:
Tails_2.6
Start date:
2016-04-25
Due date:
% Done:

100%

Feature Branch:
web/11372-2.6-release-notes
Type of work:
End-user documentation
Blueprint:

Starter:
Affected tool:
Deliverable for:

Description

Subtasks

History

#1 Updated by sajolida 2016-09-04 04:52:30

  • Assignee changed from sajolida to anonym
  • QA Check set to Ready for QA
  • Feature Branch set to web/11372-2.6-release-notes

The release notes are ready, please have a look. Some stuff is waiting clarification on the code (marked with XXX).

The tweet for announcing it could be:

Tails 2.6 is out: https://tails.boum.org/news/version_2.6, better hardware support, buffer overflow protection, and entropy pool for RNG hardware.

#2 Updated by intrigeri 2016-09-09 15:03:54

  • Status changed from Confirmed to In Progress
  • Assignee changed from anonym to sajolida
  • % Done changed from 0 to 70
  • QA Check changed from Ready for QA to Dev Needed

(Acting as the backup RM, which I am for 2 more days. I’m sorry this was not announced anywhere, so this ticket did not land onto my plate and I only noticed it today.)

Thanks, amazing work! Here are a few comments:

  • “to improve the entropy source” feels wrong: rngd brings support for additional entropy sources, but it does not improve any such source.
  • The kernel upgrade is much more important that most other upgrades (except Tor and Tor Browser), as it potentially affects all users, so perhaps it should be listed earlier?
  • “Set up the trigger for RAM erasure on shutdown earlier”: this might get reverted (Bug #10733) so you probably want to add a XXX.
  • I see no indication that Bug #11593 will be fixed, but perhaps that’s Redmine lagging behind.
  • I think we have an ikiwiki shortcut to avoid hard-coding links like https://git-tails.immerda.ch/tails/plain/debian/changelog.

#3 Updated by sajolida 2016-09-10 10:17:27

> * “to improve the entropy source” feels wrong: rngd brings support for additional entropy sources, but it does not improve any such source.

Meta: When I’m not precise enough on technical matters, please help me
with proposals and not just with pointing out what’s wrong because this
only leaves me with more doubts and we’ll have more round trips to do.
Even if I end up mangling your proposals again, they will help me
understand what you want (and not only what you dislike).

Would “to improve the entropy pool” be better?

I’ll check all the rest on Monday on Tuesday.

#4 Updated by intrigeri 2016-09-12 02:58:40

(Sorry I notice this ticket this late — it had not been reassigned to me.)

>> * “to improve the entropy source” feels wrong: rngd brings support for additional entropy sources, but it does not improve any such source.

> Meta: When I’m not precise enough on technical matters, please help me with proposals and not just with pointing out what’s wrong because […]

I had this exact concern in mind while doing my review, hence the “brings support for additional entropy sources” part, that was meant to give you the technical details that you needed to translate into something suitable for end-users. I’m sorry this did not work, and instead triggered this feeling of being pointed only at what’s wrong once again :/

> Would “to improve the entropy pool” be better?

Yes, a little bit, although it’s not 100% correct technically. How about that one:

We installed [[`rngd`|contribute/design/random#rngd]] to improve the
entropy of the random numbers generated on computers that have
a hardware random number generation device.

?

I believe that it 1. is more correct technically; 2. mentions a slightly more concrete outcome (more people might understand why random numbers are important, than those who know what entropy is about); 3. moves from “people using [..]” to “computer that have […]”, since such devices are not really meant to be “used” by humans (either your computer has one, or it hasn’t, but in both cases that’s not something one interacts with).

And now I guess I’ll stop nitpicking, as I probably have spent enough time on this topic by now :)

#5 Updated by sajolida 2016-09-13 11:47:42

  • Assignee changed from sajolida to anonym
  • QA Check changed from Dev Needed to Ready for QA

So I worked a bit more on this and I think I’m done. Here is what I did:

  • Moved Linux earlier.
  • Removed GNOME Sound Recorder.
  • Removed Bug #11593. I originally found this in the Changelog under “Security fixes” so maybe this needs to be fixed by the RM as well.
  • Used an ikiwiki shortcut for the link to the changelog.
  • Used intrigeri’s wording for the rngd thingie. I like it!
  • Changed the date to September 20.

Meta: I’m sorry I partly read your initial comment about rngd too fast and didn’t parse the proposal in it. My emotional concern is not so much about being pointed out to what I did wrong (I’m doing doc writing and it’s part of the job to ask techies for corrections) but more about having to do extra guess work. Though I admit that in this particular case I reacted a bit too fast. Anyway, we have a super cool sentence now!

I understand that anonym is the RM again until the release, so anonym:

  • Can you check what’s going on with Bug #11593 in the Changelog.
  • Tell me if you are fine checking the two remaining XXX on the day of the release and release the corresponding snippets if necessary. Then I could consider my job done on these notes.

#6 Updated by anonym 2016-09-13 13:24:04

  • % Done changed from 70 to 80

sajolida wrote:
> I understand that anonym is the RM again until the release, so anonym:
>
> * Can you check what’s going on with Bug #11593 in the Changelog.

The changelog is correct, and redmine was wrong — I’ve since fixed the ticket. Sorry for the confusion! I’ve reverted the removal of this entry in the branch.

> * Tell me if you are fine checking the two remaining XXX on the day of the release and release the corresponding snippets if necessary. Then I could consider my job done on these notes.

I will!

#7 Updated by anonym 2016-09-19 09:31:23

  • Status changed from In Progress to Fix committed
  • % Done changed from 80 to 100

Applied in changeset commit:fa91b9475f7c9475324a0651086a0f1c5b6359c9.

#8 Updated by anonym 2016-09-20 16:47:50

  • Status changed from Fix committed to Resolved
  • Assignee deleted (anonym)
  • QA Check changed from Ready for QA to Pass