Re: release date formatting

On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 07:42:27PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> writes:
> > On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 12:35:06PM -0400, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >> It has been pointed out a while ago that the "release date" formatting
> >> in the release notes is too flamboyant, more so under the new stylesheets.
> >>
> >> Here is a patch to make the formatting a bit more subdued. (Obviously,
> >> this needs to be expanded to older release notes as well.)
>
> > I see what you mean. I have changed the markup in head for all branches
> > and backpatched this so when we copy release information to back
> > branches, it matches.
>
> I'm a bit dubious about this: it may make things look nicer with the new
> docs toolchain, but did anyone check what it looks like with the old one?

I did not but the <note> tag really never made sense for the release
note date anyway, so I assumed it would be fine.

> Also, now that you mention it, the ability to copy relnote files into
> older branches verbatim was already broken by commit 85c11324c. I got
> burnt by this while making the release notes last weekend, and was quite
> annoyed but there was no time to do anything about it then. Is there
> a way to fix that, perhaps by providing some kind of alias for the
> relevant section IDs?

Yes, I noticed that myself so I assume we would have to copy just the
new _sections_ to the back branches, instead of copying the entire file
like we have done in the past, at least until this was fixed.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Ancient Roman grave inscription +