On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 01:26:16AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> writes:
> > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 05:09:04PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> >>> --details-after Show branch and author info after the commit description
> >> I don't understand the point of that.
> > The release notes have the author at the end of the text.
> So?  The committer is very often not the author, so I'm not seeing that
> this helps much.  Not to mention that the commit message is almost never
> directly usable as release note text, anyway.
> >>> --oldest-first  Show oldest commits first
> >> This also seems rather useless in comparison to how much it complicates
> >> the code.  We don't sort release note entries by commit date, so what's
> >> it matter?
> > It is very hard to read the commit messages newest-first because they
> > are often cummulative, and the order of items of equal weight is
> > oldest-first in the release notes.
> I'm unpersuaded here, too, not least because I have never heard this
> "oldest first" policy before, and it's certainly never been followed
> in any set of release notes I wrote.

So you totally skipped over the concept that reading incremental patches
is creation order is helpful.

OK, obviously having options that actually help me write the release
notes is not a priority for anyone else.  I will continue to maintain my
own version of the script, to keep the community script clean (and not
useful for me).  I just backpatched the changes since 9.1 and they
applied cleanly to my version.

  Bruce Momjian  <br...@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +

Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:

Reply via email to