On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: > On 5/10/12 9:44 AM, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> On tor, 2012-05-10 at 10:44 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: >>> The big take-away is that the release notes are mostly for blame and >>> to designate a go-to person for feature problems, not for giving >>> credit, >> >> Then reviewers should be removed. > > I disagree. We're trying to get more reviewers, and encourage them to > do more reviewing. Giving credit is a big part of that.
As much as that's nice, I don't think that's quite enough reason to do so, at least not as a last minute afterthought in trying to finalize the release notes. On the other hand, if reviewers are considered extra "go-to" people for the purposes of 'blamecasting' if something goes wrong with a new feature, that's actually a fine reason to include them. If both the developer *and* the reviewer missed an issue, then *both* are "blameworthy," and if we have any features gone desperately wrong, both deserve to have appropriate things thrown at them. -- When confronted by a difficult problem, solve it by reducing it to the question, "How would the Lone Ranger handle this?" -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
