Re: Release note bloat is getting out of hand

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Release note bloat is getting out of hand
Date: 2015-02-03 16:53:06
Message-ID: 5196.1422982386@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> writes:
> Note also that you only need to present the release notes from the
> latest stable release branch on the web site, as opposed to
> documentation for each branch.

Yeah, JD suggested the same upthread. If we went over to a separate
document containing all the historical notes, then it would make sense
for the main documentation to contain only release notes for the current
branch, which would further reduce its build time. My thread-starting
proposal of keeping the last five branches was based on the assumption
that we didn't need any whole-history document, but if we're keeping one
separately then this seems to make the most sense.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Heikki Linnakangas 2015-02-03 17:58:28 Re: PQgetssl() and alternative SSL implementations
Previous Message Heikki Linnakangas 2015-02-03 16:52:48 Re: Getting rid of LSEG.m