Re: Release note trimming: another modest proposal
От | Andres Freund |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Release note trimming: another modest proposal |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20190205172817.iatgselxmfeqda5g@alap3.anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Release note trimming: another modest proposal (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Release note trimming: another modest proposal
|
Список | pgsql-docs |
Hi, On 2019-02-05 12:24:00 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: > > On 2019-02-05 12:10:57 -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > >> For something like release-9-6-10.html, there's no value in having it > >> appear in three or four different places. You can't even argue that > >> the later branches might be more up-to-date: that text is *the same*, > >> modulo toolchain-forced markup differences, in every branch; or at > >> least if it isn't it means I screwed up. > > > If somebody proposed adding automatic redirects from the older linked > > versions to the newest /current/ URL with that version's release notes, > > I'm not sure I would have argued against that. But I do *not* think > > it's actually accurate they are the same - it's a significant difference > > that they're linking to the corresponding version's pages, because those > > will contain that version's syntax / docs. > > Huh? The release note contents are identical cross-branch. > I know, because I'm generally the one making them. The point is that links in release-$version.html in /current/ or in a magical new repo will likely contain references to other pages in the docs. Even when the contents of the specific release-*.html page look the same, the pages they link to will differ more. As I said, that's not necessarily bad, but that did use to be a difference between the pages depending on which version they are from. Greetings, Andres Freund
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: