Horton

Re: Draft release notes complete

Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>

View thread
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, PeterEisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2012-05-11T14:15:50Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →

  1. Expose track_iotiming information via pg_stat_statements.

  2. Rewrite GiST support code for rangetypes.

  3. Clean up a couple of box gist helper functions.

  4. Replace the "New Linear" GiST split algorithm for boxes and points with a

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 10:01:32AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 09:51:49AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > On 05/11/2012 08:56 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 08:46:56PM -0700, Robert Haas wrote:
> > >>On May 10, 2012, at 4:19 PM, Andrew Dunstan<andrew@dunslane.net>  wrote:
> > >>>On 05/10/2012 06:15 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> > >>>>How about a hybrid: we continue to identify patch authors as now, that is with names attached to the feature/bugfix descriptions, and then have a separate section "Other Contributors" to recognize patch reviewers and other helpers?
> > >>>works for me.
> > >>Me, too.
> > >That does not work for me.  There is no practical reason for a list of
> > >names to appear in the release notes.  I suggest if we want to do that
> > >that we remove all names from the release notes (as Tom suggested), and
> > >create a wiki for credit, and link to that from the release
> > >announcement.  That would allow us to put company names in there too.
> > >
> > 
> > I gave you a reason. You might not agree with it but saying that
> > it's no reason doesn't make it so. A wiki page will just be
> > duplication, IMNSHO.
> 
> I mean a reason from the reader/development-process perspective, not
> from the perspective of giving a some benefit to contributors.

Let me add that I am concerned about the lack of objectivity in many of
the suggestions in this thread.  This has prompted me to think that the
temptation of having names on these release note items is just too
great, and that the names should be removed.

Let me put it this way --- the release notes are read by thousands of
people.  The benefit individuals gather from their names in the release
notes is a small part of the overall value provided by the release notes
to users.  There was a practical need to have names on items in the past
--- that need is no longer present.

I predict that if we twist the release notes to have PR value for
contributors, it will become a prepetual problem and will diminish the
cohesiveness of our group.  I am already personally upset by a few of
the things I have seen on this thread.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +