From: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> |
Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: list of acknowledgments for PG16 |
Date: | 2023-08-25 12:22:36 |
Message-ID: | CABUevEx_UdnKf8+Up2DoHC=_yackSZc-ojXma0JXn+FA5nBztQ@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Aug 22, 2023 at 4:03 PM Joe Conway <mail(at)joeconway(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On 8/22/23 09:44, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> >> On 2023-Aug-22, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> >>> The list of acknowledgments for the PG16 release notes has been committed.
> >>> It should show up here sometime: <https://www.postgresql.org/docs/16/release-16.html#RELEASE-16-ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS>.
> >
> >> Hmm, I think these docs would only regenerate during the RC1 release, so
> >> it'll be a couple of weeks, unless we manually poke the doc builder.
> >
> > Yeah. I could produce a new set of tarballs from the v16 branch tip,
> > but I don't know the process (nor have the admin permissions) to
> > extract the HTML docs and put them on the website.
>
>
> These days the docs update is part of a scripted process for doing an
> entire release.
>
> I'm sure we could figure out how to just release the updated docs, but
> with RC1 a week away, is it really worthwhile?
We've also been pretty strict to say that we don't *want* unreleased
docs on the website for any of our stable branches before, so changing
that would be a distinct policy change as well. And doing such an
exception for just one commit seems like it's set up for problems --
you'd then have to do another one as soon as an adjustment is made.
And in the end, that would mean changing the policy to say that the
"release branches documentation tracks branch tip instead of
releases". Which I generally speaking don't think is a good idea,
because then they don't match what people are running anymore. I think
it only really makes sense for this one part of the docs -- even other
changes to the REL16 docs should be excluded until the next release is
(this time, RC1).
Bottom line is, definite -1 for doing a one-off change that violates
the principle we're on.
Now, if we want a *separate* location where we continuously load
branch tip docs that's a different thing and certainly something we
could consider.
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Daniel Gustafsson | 2023-08-25 12:32:56 | Re: list of acknowledgments for PG16 |
Previous Message | vignesh C | 2023-08-25 12:10:36 | Re: persist logical slots to disk during shutdown checkpoint |