Better release notes

[timeless]

Sean Farley wrote:
> I assume that these commit messages were from employees with commit
> access? If that's true, then that's a bit different than patch-based
> review where we can edit and review the commit message / notes.

Well, we had two sources:
1. Mozilla upstream, where in theory messages were curated, but
possibly too technical to be useful to our audience
2. In house, where people had commit access, and while we could have
tried to review, practically the pace prevented anything useful -- and
I was the primary native speaker, my colleagues weren't native
speakers.

But note: even for Mercurial, getting commit messages to be great is
hard. At this point I tune in once every couple of weeks and batch
read, typically long after code has landed.

For Cordova, where I think >50% of committers were native speakers,
and where we had PRs, and comments, the commit logs weren't good
enough for Release notes either. So, expecting to rely on commit
messages as a final truth isn't a great idea.

As a side note: I'm currently running my spelling checker against
dozens of open source projects, and one of the portions with the
highest spelling error rate is changelogs/commit messages.