Обсуждение: release notes.. added stefan

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

attached

- -- 

      === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564   24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997  http://www.commandprompt.com/
            UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHVwwZATb/zqfZUUQRAjZyAJ92eIg9+Pk7jiexbQNKLTR2X5m0NwCgpIRs
UM0gn1UEqX81/R3eLyvWd44=
=ep3U
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Joshua D. Drake wrote:

>
> attached

Isn't it too verbose?  I thought we were moving away with mentioning
every single change?  A single entry to mention psql autocomplete
improvements should be OK ...

--
Alvaro Herrera                               http://www.PlanetPostgreSQL.org/
"We are who we choose to be", sang the goldfinch
when the sun is high (Sandman)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wed, 5 Dec 2007 19:25:14 -0300
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> wrote:

> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> 
> > 
> > attached
> 
> Isn't it too verbose?  I thought we were moving away with mentioning
> every single change?  A single entry to mention psql autocomplete
> improvements should be OK ...
> 

I added both because they were actually different autocomplete features
but otherwise sure.. It could be:

<listitem>
        <para>
         Added multiple aut-complete paths to psql including FULL
TEXT and ENABLE/DISABLE REPLICA
         (Stefan)
       </para>
      </listitem>

??

Joshua D. Drake

- -- 

      === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564   24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
PostgreSQL solutions since 1997  http://www.commandprompt.com/
            UNIQUE NOT NULL
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHVycCATb/zqfZUUQRAnzcAKCNZJ0WWsw1uJw+7G5xvWm/L8TlQACeOGCv
gjLVC7K+yUZjhoOPxE2NqPQ=
=4HBa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>> attached

> Isn't it too verbose?  I thought we were moving away with mentioning
> every single change?  A single entry to mention psql autocomplete
> improvements should be OK ...

AFAIR, past practice is that autocompletion fixes don't make the
release notes at all.

It might be worth reminding folks that the release notes do not
exist for the purpose of mentioning contributors.

            regards, tom lane

Tom Lane wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
>> Joshua D. Drake wrote:
>>> attached
>
>> Isn't it too verbose?  I thought we were moving away with mentioning
>> every single change?  A single entry to mention psql autocomplete
>> improvements should be OK ...
>
> AFAIR, past practice is that autocompletion fixes don't make the
> release notes at all.

 From what I can tell, he has done quite a few of them which is why I
submitted the patch. *shrug*

>
> It might be worth reminding folks that the release notes do not
> exist for the purpose of mentioning contributors.

Then why do we mention them at all in the release notes?

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake

"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> It might be worth reminding folks that the release notes do not
>> exist for the purpose of mentioning contributors.

> Then why do we mention them at all in the release notes?

You've got the motivation backwards.  We mention the responsible
(blameworthy?) persons when describing a change that users might
find interesting.  We don't insert release-note entries that users
wouldn't find interesting, just for the purpose of mentioning who
did it.  Which seemed to me to be mostly the point of your proposed
addition.

            regards, tom lane

Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
>> Tom Lane wrote:
>>> It might be worth reminding folks that the release notes do not
>>> exist for the purpose of mentioning contributors.
>
>> Then why do we mention them at all in the release notes?
>
> You've got the motivation backwards.  We mention the responsible
> (blameworthy?) persons when describing a change that users might
> find interesting.  We don't insert release-note entries that users
> wouldn't find interesting, just for the purpose of mentioning who
> did it.  Which seemed to me to be mostly the point of your proposed
> addition.

You are correct that would be why I submitted it. My motivation may have
been backward based on the above definition but I assure you when people
are looking at the release notes they are not looking to see who is
responsible in the sense you are mentioning. Most are looking for
recognition. I would never have considered your reasoning above.

When someone puts a concerted effort to provide a better user experience
for our number one used client (psql) and they aren't mentioned in the
release notes, that to me would be an oversight worth adjustment.

Of course that assumes we are on the same page for what the mention in
the release notes is for, which we aren't :).

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake