| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <peter(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Vik Reykja <vikreykja(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Draft release notes complete |
| Date: | 2012-05-10 13:20:32 |
| Message-ID: | 1336655874-sup-5969@alvh.no-ip.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Excerpts from Peter Geoghegan's message of jue may 10 09:12:57 -0400 2012:
> On 10 May 2012 13:45, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> wrote:
> > Right, but I think it would be good to identify them explicitly as reviewers
> > if we're going to include the names.
>
> +1. I think we should probably do more to credit reviewers. It's not
> uncommon for a reviewer to end up becoming a co-author, particularly
> if they're a committer, but it's a little misleading to add a reviewer
> after the feature description without qualifying that they are the
> reviewer.
Agreed.
What about crediting patch sponsors (other than the author's employer, I
mean)? I remember crediting one in a commit message and being told it
wasn't okay. Is it okay to credit them in the release notes?
--
Álvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
PostgreSQL Replication, Consulting, Custom Development, 24x7 support
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Kevin Grittner | 2012-05-10 14:28:17 | Re: Gsoc2012 idea, tablesample |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2012-05-10 13:12:57 | Re: Draft release notes complete |