> On 12 Mar 2024, at 02:37, Nathan Bossart <nathandboss...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 05:17:13PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 04:12:04PM -0500, Nathan Bossart wrote:
>>> I've read that the use of the term "minor release" can be confusing. While
>>> the versioning page clearly describes what is eligible for a minor release,
>>> not everyone reads it, so I suspect that many folks think there are new
>>> features, etc. in minor releases. I think a "minor release" of Postgres is
>>> more similar to what other projects would call a "patch version."
>>
>> Well, we do say:
>>
>> While upgrading will always contain some level of risk, PostgreSQL
>> minor releases fix only frequently-encountered bugs, security issues,
>> and data corruption problems to reduce the risk associated with
>> upgrading. For minor releases, the community considers not upgrading to
>> be riskier than upgrading.
>>
>> but that is far down the page. Do we need to improve this?
>
> I think making that note more visible would certainly be an improvement.
We have this almost at the top of the page, which IMHO isn't a very good
description about what a minor version is:
Each major version receives bug fixes and, if need be, security fixes
that are released at least once every three months in what we call a
"minor release."
Maybe we can rewrite that sentence to properly document what a minor is (bug
fixes *and* security fixes) with a small blurb about the upgrade risk?
(Adding Jonathan in CC: who is good at website copy).
--
Daniel Gustafsson
