From: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: 9.5 release notes |
Date: | 2015-06-29 21:16:14 |
Message-ID: | 20150629211614.GK30708@awork2.anarazel.de |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 2015-06-29 17:05:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> +1. Helps confirm which items are meant to correspond to which commits.
That's what made me think of it.
> In case you didn't realize it already, the stuff I put into the minor
> release notes is from src/tools/git_changelog. Dunno whether we need
> to use that exact format for major releases though; there's no need to
> identify branches in major release notes.
I'd recognized the format, but I didn't want to exactly go that way. As
you say, the branch information is redundant.
Haven't yet thought much about the format, maybe in the style of
git log --pretty='format:[%h] %aN [%ci]: %s' upstream/master
I'd personally like to see the hash and the time, the rest isn't
particularly important to me.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2015-06-29 21:30:57 | Re: 9.5 release notes |
Previous Message | Jim Nasby | 2015-06-29 21:14:34 | Re: pg_stat_*_columns? |