Re: Draft release notes complete

From: Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Draft release notes complete
Date: 2012-05-10 18:43:48
Message-ID: CAFNqd5XhniWk0fbo00rfyXWUbMpwm3n1Zxe-vvjw1tsduCwqmg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> On 5/10/12 9:44 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>> On tor, 2012-05-10 at 10:44 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>>> The big take-away is that the release notes are mostly for blame and
>>> to designate a go-to person for feature problems, not for giving
>>> credit,
>>
>> Then reviewers should be removed.
>
> I disagree.  We're trying to get more reviewers, and encourage them to
> do more reviewing.  Giving credit is a big part of that.

As much as that's nice, I don't think that's quite enough reason to do
so, at least not as a last minute afterthought in trying to finalize
the release notes.

On the other hand, if reviewers are considered extra "go-to" people
for the purposes of 'blamecasting' if something goes wrong with a new
feature, that's actually a fine reason to include them. If both the
developer *and* the reviewer missed an issue, then *both* are
"blameworthy," and if we have any features gone desperately wrong,
both deserve to have appropriate things thrown at them.
--
When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the
question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?"

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2012-05-10 19:01:33 Re: Corner cases with GiST n-way splits
Previous Message Robert Haas 2012-05-10 18:30:35 Re: Gsoc2012 idea, tablesample