On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 03:42:48PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote: > > > How many names on a single item is ideal? The activity of reviewers and > > their names on commit messages has greatly expanded the number of > > potential names per item. > > > > How much of a downside is having the names in the release notes? For > > example, we decided that company names shouldn't be on release note > > items, so there is a case where we decided names were more of a negative > > than a positive. Are there other negatives? Do other project release > > notes have developer names? How are these names perceived by our > > general readers? > > The two paragraphs above show the main problem. > > Who gets listed on each item is a matter of some contention. For > example, if Robert Haas reviews a patch, and makes substantial > suggesitons and fixes to the patch, should he be listed on it as well? > If so, how much work is required for someone to be listed if they're not > the original author? What if we merge two patches, but take 90% of > Patch A and only 10% of Patch B? etc.
One idea I just had was to optionally put developer names on section headings. That would remove my name from the nine pg_upgrade entries in the pg_upgrade section. We could put Tom Lane's name at the top of the optimizer section, and some of the server-side languages could be trimmed down this way. Should we go with a single developer per item, and then let people suggest corrections? With reviewers involved, and often multiple commit messages per release note item, the just isn't enough detail in git logs to reproduce this accurately. I also over-emphasized new developers/reviewers, but that seems to have distorted the other goals unacceptably. -- 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: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
