Re: Draft release notes complete

On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 04:16:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> > Well, that would be fine, too.  What I think is bizarre is that I got
> > credit for some things I was barely involved in (like SP-gist) and no
> > credit for other things I spent a LOT of time on (like security views
> > and some of KaiGai's other stuff), and similarly for other people.
> > Similarly, some things I am credited on involve very significant
> > contributions from other people and others are cases where I did
> > nearly all the work.  I think it's weird to lump all those cases
> > together without any distinction.
> 
> Well, you know, these are *draft* release notes.  Feel free to correct
> them anywhere you believe they are inaccurate.

Yep.

> I think the bigger issue here is that we don't seem to have consensus
> about whether to include reviewers' names.  Bruce evidently thinks
> that's a good idea, else he wouldn't have done it, but I only recall one
> other person speaking in favor of it.  Everybody else seems to think
> that it'll be too verbose.

There were 2-3 who liked the reviewer names.  The bottom line is it is
easy to _remove_ names;  it requires a lot of research to add them.

One creative idea would be to keep the reviewer names as-is, but trim
the release notes down to a single name just before final release.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
 + It's impossible for everything to be true. +