| 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: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | 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
| 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 |