Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove pre-7.4 documentaiton mentions, now that 8.0 is the oldest

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove pre-7.4 documentaiton mentions, now that 8.0 is the oldest
Date: 2010-02-24 15:37:17
Message-ID: 201002241537.o1OFbHs06694@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-committers pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > Robert Haas wrote:
> >> On Wed, Feb 24, 2010 at 5:03 AM, Stefan Kaltenbrunner
> >> <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> wrote:
> >>> per http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/PostgreSQL_Release_Support_Policy 7.4 is
> >>> still supported for a few months to come (and will be EOL'd together with
> >>> 8.0). I'm also not really sure why we need to change stuff like that, this
> >>> kind of information might still be useful for somebody trying to upgrade
> >>> from an unsupported release to a supported one.
> >>
> >> Yeah.
>
> > Well, the documentation still exists in the old releases, even 8.4. The
> > big question is how much back-version information we should keep in our
> > docs, and does it make sense to keep paragraphs around that are only
> > meaningful to < 1% of people reading it. Some people are saying keep
> > more, some are saying keep less, so I am betting I have hit the proper
> > balance. ;-)
>
> I didn't really agree with what you took out before, and I am definitely
> going to object to this latest set of diffs. What it appears to me
> you have done is a search-and-destroy on any paragraph mentioning "7.x",
> without any consideration of whether that removes important information
> from the overall presentation. Those paras are generally comparing old
> and new behavior, and even if you don't care specifically what the old
> behavior was, they present useful explanation of the new behavior.

Yea, let me try again and rephrase some of it to highlight the behavior
and not the version change.

> I also agree with the objection that there are still lots of people who
> are going to be trying to port old apps to 9.0.

Well, I stand by my statement that it is a judgement call on how much we
keep, and there is a cost to readers to keep it, but there isn't very
much of it. Are the people who wanted more aggressive removal OK with
putting back the pre-7.4 documentation mentions?

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
PG East: http://www.enterprisedb.com/community/nav-pg-east-2010.do
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-committers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2010-02-24 15:43:08 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove pre-7.4 documentaiton mentions, now that 8.0 is the oldest
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-02-24 15:33:18 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove pre-7.4 documentaiton mentions, now that 8.0 is the oldest

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Marc G. Fournier 2010-02-24 15:43:08 Re: Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove pre-7.4 documentaiton mentions, now that 8.0 is the oldest
Previous Message Tom Lane 2010-02-24 15:33:18 Re: [COMMITTERS] pgsql: Remove pre-7.4 documentaiton mentions, now that 8.0 is the oldest