Release notes answer the single most important question that potential upgraders ask: why should I bother? A list of two hundred grouped pull requests has no answer. Neither does a paragraph touting the team’s enthusiasm about the release.
We go through commit logs, closed tickets, and support queue to figure out the changes that customers will actually see. Most releases have four of those and a hundred others that no one outside your team should have to see.
Someone else creates a maintenance window after reading your submission. Absent a version described in a deprecation notice or stating that a change is an improvement, that window becomes an incident. Precise descriptions of versions and dates and of any changes in default value take precedence over nearly every stylistic concern.
A model that can rephrase two hundred commit messages neatly is the problem. It cannot discern that commit 137 changed a default timeout and will break every integration on a slow network, and therefore carries the same weight and formatting as a fix for a tooltip with a typo.
The writer sorts through the commit range and closed issues and places them in three separate piles: customer actions are required, customer issues will surface, and internal-only. Absolutely everything in the first pile is sent to the respective engineer, as a commit message usually does not reference to who the change affects.
Review is a reconciliation. This means that for every item in Review, we verify that it was committed to a code change or a ticket, check the version numbers to ensure that we are shipping what we actually built, and review the migration instructions with someone who was not the author of the migration instruction. Any changes that we could not attribute will instead be documented for your team.
One rate, whatever the format: $10 per 100 words. You are paying for the writer’s time and judgement, so the price scales with the words rather than with a package tier.
| Typical release documentation | Words | Writing | Fee (1%) | You pay |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Short | 500 | $50 | $0.50 | $50.50 |
| Standard | 1,000 | $100 | $1 | $101 |
| In-depth | 2,000 | $200 | $2 | $202 |
The writer receives 100% of the writing price. Our 1% fee is added on top of it, and 0.5% is donated to tree planting. Full pricing breakdown.
Yes. Send two or three pieces you like the sound of, or your style guide. Matching an established voice is ordinary work for a writer and close to impossible for a model that has never read your back catalogue.
Yes. Tell us the volume and cadence and we keep the same writer on the account so the voice stays consistent. The rate does not change with volume.
The method employed does work well. Since the commit range and your tickets are the starting point for reverse ordering, one benefit is that customers’ queries will show which changes failed to include explanations, and thus require it.
To your disclosure policy, not ours. The writer drafts what you send to publish with the timing of the embargo, and your security team evaluates the wording before it is sent to publish. We do not define the publishing threshold in regard to how much detail about a vulnerability can be made public.
Completely. Copyright transfers to you on delivery, with no attribution requirement and no licence back to us. Nothing written for you is resold, repurposed or republished.
Reviews from completed, paid orders in this category.
For six releases, our change log buried a breaking change in the release note, behind six other features. The writer has chosen to put breaking changes at the top of the release not with features. That makes obvious sense. It should have been done long ago. And we’re down to the last one!
We have never recorded our three architecture talks but we have now. One of the teams who take note of things and join in a session and then compile a summary of the two positions once we’ve made our decision. Saw that as a good opportunity to strengthen their practice so no longer have any new hires asking questions. Parent 1: rewr22567 Parent 2: autograder
Most writers omit error response text, or post the status codes with no surrounding context. Ours explained what they thought the caller did wrong with a short response per status. Because of this explanation, our support queue for that endpoint has gone quiet.
We do not ask you to take the no-AI promise on trust. Each draft is run through these platforms and the reports are attached to your delivery email.
Originality.aiAI detection + plagiarism
GPTZeroAI detection
TurnitinAI detection + similarity
CopyleaksAI detection + plagiarism
Winston AIAI detection
ZeroGPTAI detection
SaplingAI detection
Content at ScaleAI detection
Send the brief, get a human draft back within 3 days. No account, no subscription, no AI.
$10 per 100 words · all of it to the writer · 0.5% to trees