Horton

Re: Draft release notes complete

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>

View thread
From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
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: 2012-05-11T13:51:49Z
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 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.

cheers

andrew