Re: [DOCS] should we have a separate page that clearly defines what a minor release is and why it's a good idea to keep up with them?

On 2/22/07, Joshua D. Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > On the front page, we already have "Latest Releases" with links to the >> > most recent release for each version still actively maintained and >> > release notes. (Would it make sense to change that title from "Latest >> > Releases" to

Re: [DOCS] should we have a separate page that clearly defines what a minor release is and why it's a good idea to keep up with them?

>> > On the front page, we already have "Latest Releases" with links to the >> > most recent release for each version still actively maintained and >> > release notes. (Would it make sense to change that title from "Latest >> > Releases" to "Actively Maintained Releases") >> >> I think not. The m

Re: [DOCS] should we have a separate page that clearly defines what a minor release is and why it's a good idea to keep up with them?

On 2/22/07, Magnus Hagander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Andrew Hammond wrote: > On 2/21/07, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> OK, the FAQ now has: >> >> The PostgreSQL team makes only bug fixes in minor releases, >> so, for example, upgrading from 7.4.8 to 7.4.9 does not requir

Re: [DOCS] should we have a separate page that clearly defines what a minor release is and why it's a good idea to keep up with them?

Andrew Hammond wrote: > On 2/21/07, Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> OK, the FAQ now has: >> >> The PostgreSQL team makes only bug fixes in minor releases, >> so, for example, upgrading from 7.4.8 to 7.4.9 does not require >> a dump and restore; merely stop the database s