On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > 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.
At this point I think we are just trying to get a list of items that need to be done before we can release beta. Very little, if anything, should be getting added to that list at this point. ...Robert -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
