| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(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>, 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: Credit in the release notes WAS: Draft release notes complete |
| Date: | 2012-05-13 04:42:41 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmobtWw0e1QxSM1msPF8ZDP35sJwSoTqSG2H6x5uJEiBS2w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 10:35 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
>> I haven't yet heard any very good argument for deviating from our
>> past practice, which is to credit just the principal author(s)
>> of each patch, not reviewers.
>
> Is that what people want? Reviewers are easily removed.
+1 from me.
> What about
> committers who adjust the patch?
It's usually pretty clear from the commit message whether the patch
was adjusted a little bit (in which case, there is no need to credit
the committer, any more than we'd credit Thom Brown for a patch in
which he found doc typos) or substantially (in which case the
committer should be credited). If it's not clear, take your best
guess and someone can let you know if there's an issue.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2012-05-13 06:34:35 | Re: Credit in the release notes WAS: Draft release notes complete |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2012-05-13 04:37:52 | Re: Draft release notes complete |