Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [DOCS] should we have a separate page that clearly defines what a minor release is and why it's a good idea to keep up with them?

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Andrew Hammond <andrew(dot)george(dot)hammond(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org, PostgreSQL www <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [DOCS] should we have a separate page that clearly defines what a minor release is and why it's a good idea to keep up with them?
Date: 2007-02-22 12:35:33
Message-ID: 45DD8E15.2050006@hagander.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docspgsql-www
Andrew Hammond wrote:
> On 2/21/07, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> 
>> OK, the FAQ now has:
>>
>>     <P>The PostgreSQL team makes only bug fixes in minor releases,
>>     so, for example, upgrading from 7.4.8 to 7.4.9 does not require
>>     a dump and restore;  merely stop the database server, install
>>     the updated binaries, and restart the server.</P>
>>
>>     <P>All users should upgrade to the most recent minor release as soon
>>     as it is available.  While upgrades always have some risk, PostgreSQL
>>     minor releases fix only common bugs to reduce the risk of upgrading.
>>     The community considers <i>not</i> upgrading more risky that
>>     upgrading.</P>
>>
>> What should change about this text?
> 
> That it's in the FAQ? I think this is one of the most common
> misunderstandings for people outside the community, so I think we need
> to find a better way to communicate about it.

Agreed.


> On the front page, we already have "Latest Releases" with links to the
> most recent release for each version still actively maintained and
> release notes.  (Would it make sense to change that title from "Latest
> Releases" to "Actively Maintained Releases")

I think not. The meaning is "latest releases available for each branch",
not "these are the actively maintained branches".


> What I'd like to see right under it is something like "Minimize your
> risk by keeping up with minor revisions." Which would link to a page
> (perhaps that section of the FAQ) that says something like the
> following.

I'm bouncing this over to -www as well to hear what people think about
that part. If we do that, I'd definitely like to see a proper page and
not just a FAQ link.

> There was a posting a while ago about projected lifespans of major
> releases that got side-tracked into a discussion about dropping
> windows builds for 8.0 and 8.1. I think this is related, but I haven't
> figured out how we can express these ideas.

I fully agree that we need some kind of page that explains "versioning
policy" or something like that. Like how 8.1 is in principle an "equally
major" release as 8.0.

//Magnus


In response to

Responses

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Andrew HammondDate: 2007-02-22 23:41:20
Subject: Re: [DOCS] should we have a separate page that clearly defines what a minor release is and why it's a good idea to keep up with them?
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2007-02-21 22:54:23
Subject: Re: should we have a separate page that clearly defines what a minor release is and why it's a good idea to keep up with them?

pgsql-www by date

Next:From: Guillaume LelargeDate: 2007-02-22 13:22:39
Subject: Re: Language data
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2007-02-22 12:33:03
Subject: Re: Language data

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group