Tom Lane wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > > OK, I am all wet. I now understand why the editing is the > > time-consuming part of this job. On the plus side it is probably > > possible to parallelize it to some degree by splitting the list into N > > pieces after the "remove insignificant items" step. > > The advantage of having one person do it (and do it over a short period > of time) is that you end up with a fairly uniform "voice" across the > whole set of notes. Since we lack a professional copy editor, we'd have > a hard time coming out with something that wasn't pretty obviously a > patchwork if several people did bits of it. > > In any case, the release notes aren't normally a bottleneck. I still > think that Bruce had his priorities out of whack in not cleaning up > his open-items list before doing this. If he had done so, nobody > would have noticed how long the notes took.
Ah, but the open items list is never done; it is always in flux and will be probably until final release. Also, you can't just put out the open items list becuase then there is a flurry of activity and people want you to keep the list current. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
