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?

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