| From: | Euler Taveira <euler(at)timbira(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, PeterEisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Draft release notes complete |
| Date: | 2012-05-13 00:11:49 |
| Message-ID: | 4FAEFC45.4020809@timbira.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 12-05-2012 10:27, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> How many names on a single item is ideal? The activity of reviewers and
> their names on commit messages has greatly expanded the number of
> potential names per item.
>
Main authors only. Reviewers should be mentioned only in the commit log. If I
coded a feature and Bruce got the idea worked in another patch (that is better
then mine), I think only Bruce should be credited in release notes (but I
could be mentioned in the commit log as the feature designer). However, if I
posted a patch and Robert improved that patch using only 30% of my work, I
should be credited (as coauthor) because he used a considerable part of my work.
I confess that I like the link for relevant commit log in the release notes.
--
Euler Taveira de Oliveira - Timbira http://www.timbira.com.br/
PostgreSQL: Consultoria, Desenvolvimento, Suporte 24x7 e Treinamento
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2012-05-13 00:48:52 | Re: Latch-ifying the syslogger process |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2012-05-12 23:23:41 | Re: Latch-ifying the syslogger process |