| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-core <pgsql-core(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [CORE] postpone next week's release |
| Date: | 2015-05-29 22:28:01 |
| Message-ID: | 20150529222800.GG16602@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 05:37:13PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > Do we need release notes for an alpha? Once I do the release notes, it
> > is possible to miss subtle changes in the code that aren't mentioned in
> > commit messages.
>
> If the commit message isn't clear about something, you'd likely miss the
> issue anyway, no? Anyway, once the release notes are in the tree, we
I often do research in the git tree to get details on the feature beyond
just looking at the commit or the patch.
> could expect that anyone committing a user-visible semantics change should
> update the release notes themselves.
Yes, that would be nice.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2015-05-29 22:29:46 | Re: Re: [GENERAL] 9.4.1 -> 9.4.2 problem: could not access status of transaction 1 |
| Previous Message | Josh Berkus | 2015-05-29 22:08:27 | Re: RFC: Remove contrib entirely |