Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Bruce Momjian writes: > > > If they _must_ be done the way you suggest, why have we been able to > > generate reliable release notes all these years? > > With all respect for your work and your enthusiasm for this approach, but > personally, I have absolutely no confidence that the release notes are > complete, accurate, or reliable. That is my deeply founded motivation for > trying to institute changes. But I might be wrong and my fears might have > no merit.
Sure, I fear missing things too. One of my goals is to make sure I understand all the CVS commit messages that appear, so I know later I can make a release note about it. Right now, we have a simple process that you can move through step by step and make sure you get everything. With a piecemeal approach, I think we are much more likely to miss something, or have things get confused by merging a CVS log version and a piecemeal version. Looking at the past, I don't remember us missing anything --- I do remember missing a few items that should have been listed in the compatibilities section, but that is more of a problem of us not reviewing the release notes thoroughly. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 6: Have you searched our list archives? http://archives.postgresql.org
