Re: 9.5 release notes

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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?