Re: Draft release notes complete

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@commandprompt.com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2012-05-10T22:15:12Z
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

Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
>> It's been said elsewhere that adding all this to the release notes as
>> found on the official docs would be too bulky.  How about having a
>> second copy of the release notes that contains authorship info as
>> proposed by Andrew?  Then the docs could have no names at all, and
>> credit would be given by some other page in the website (to which the
>> release notes would link).

> Personally, I'd love to have something really simple, with just 3 sections:

> "Contributors to PostgreSQL 9.2"

> (1) Specific Patch Contributors
> 	patch, original (co) author name

> (2) Patch reviewers
> 	list without specific patch affiliation

> (3) Other Contributors to this release
> 	anyone who contributed but isn't mentioned above

> I think if we get any more complicated, this is going to become a major
> chore for someone, and then it won't get done.

The other problem with such an approach is that section (1) would be
extremely duplicative of the main release-notes text.  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?

			regards, tom lane