Skip to content

Release-notes: draft post-4.28 collection doc [review structure] - #555

Open
tiffany-kobiton wants to merge 4 commits into
mainfrom
docs/release-notes-2026-08-14
Open

Release-notes: draft post-4.28 collection doc [review structure]#555
tiffany-kobiton wants to merge 4 commits into
mainfrom
docs/release-notes-2026-08-14

Conversation

@tiffany-kobiton

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

Entries included

Ticket Source Release section Notes
KOB-52048 PR #540 == 2026.07.28 — Device passcode First-connection passcode fix
KOB-48664 Slack (no Ranch PR) == 2026.08.10 — Device management Force-offline + old banner removal; EPA-04 replacement (KOB-54286) still To Do
KOB-51470 PR #539 == Target release TBD — Security Banner Standalone-only; validation open
KOB-43481 PR #541 == Target release TBD — Scriptless Test Runs Three held items preserved as inline comments
KOB-54289 PR #548 == Target release TBD — Device details Product-doc change parked on #548
KOB-53798 PR #549 == Target release TBD — Convert a mixed session… New-feature shape; product-doc changes parked on #549

Open questions for reviewer

  • Title, italic-date format, filename convention
  • Per-release-date == sectioning vs alternative structures (rolling monthly page? one CI/CD page?)
  • Whether to distinguish "New features and major changes" vs "Improvements and fixes" as sub-sections within each release date
  • Whether the Target release TBD entries should ship at all, or wait until each ships and joins its own dated section
  • nav.adoc — not updated; sidebar placement pending structural decisions

Test plan

  • Preview the page in a local Antora build to confirm rendering
  • Confirm no broken xrefs (Security Banner entry references organization:change-the-login-message.adoc)
  • Decide on nav.adoc update before publishing

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

First collection doc for date-based CI/CD release notes post-4.28.
Aggregates entries from PRs #540, #541, #548, #549 and KOB-48664
(sourced from Slack; no Robot Ranch PR was generated).

Structural decisions (filename, title, per-release-date sectioning,
new-features vs improvements-and-fixes classification) are placeholders
and flagged inline for reviewer input. Product doc updates bundled in
PRs #548 and #549 are held for a separate pass and remain parked on
their source PRs.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
tiffany-kobiton added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 14, 2026
Release-note entry migrated into the post-4.28 collection doc via PR #555.
Scoping this PR to the product-doc change on install-an-app.adoc only.
TODO comment retained pending independent verification against a
released build.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
tiffany-kobiton added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 14, 2026
Release-note entry migrated into the post-4.28 collection doc via PR #555.
Scoping this PR to the product-doc changes on start-a-mixed-session.adoc
and test-cases.adoc only.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@tiffany-kobiton tiffany-kobiton self-assigned this Aug 14, 2026
@tiffany-kobiton tiffany-kobiton added question Further information is requested release note Release note level updates new doc An entirely new page must be made ready for review Doc is ready for review labels Aug 14, 2026
@tiffany-kobiton tiffany-kobiton changed the title docs(release-notes): draft post-4.28 collection doc [DRAFT — review structure] Release-notes: draft post-4.28 collection doc [review structure] Aug 14, 2026
Original text:

// KOB-51470 (PR #539): fix was in open PRs and had not completed test validation when the draft
// was written. Standalone-only change — no post-4.28 Standalone release page exists yet, so
// filing under the collection doc with a Standalone callout in the entry text.

== Security Banner

- Fixed *Settings > Security Banner* being blocked on Standalone deployments. The page displayed _Security Banner setting page is available by upgrading your plan_ instead of the banner editor, which prevented admins from editing or publishing the login message and stopped published banners from appearing to users at sign-in.
+
** Subscription expiry no longer gates the Security Banner on Standalone deployments, where plan upgrades do not apply. Cloud deployments are unaffected.
** Permission requirements are unchanged. Only *Admins* or users with the `org_setting.modify_security_banner` permission can change the xref:organization:change-the-login-message.adoc[login message,window=read-later].

@erincbailey erincbailey left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just a few notes.
I couldn't see this in the preview - not sure if it's because it is a few days old?
Also - how do I read the Reviewer Notes - are they telling me things that are not being done for a particular section? ARe they before a section after? Just trying to figure out context if random or not.

// (Force offline outdated deviceConnect, Auto upgrade deviceConnect feature) are held for a
// separate pass. No Robot Ranch draft PR was generated for this ticket — sourced from Slack.

== Device management

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I know it's on the Device Management page. But, this is more about Kobiton version management. Should we update the title?

@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
= Release Notes
:navtitle: Release notes

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the navtitle what shows up in the navigation? Should it be more specific - like the date August 14, 2026 or more in the build format 260814?

- The Test Case preserves the original recorded order across the manual and automation steps, and tags each step with its source.
- Convert from Session Explorer or from the *+New Test Case* pop-up on the Test Cases list page. Search for eligible sessions with `type:mixed`.
- Test Cases converted from a mixed session show *Mixed* as the Source type.
- A Revisit replays each step through the execution path that matches its source and reports per-step results. Steps with no replayable equivalent, such as an unsupported Appium endpoint, are skipped with a reason and the run continues.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Instead of Revisit - can we use "A test run" since that's the terminology in the UI?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

new doc An entirely new page must be made question Further information is requested ready for review Doc is ready for review release note Release note level updates

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants