Re: volunteer to draft next update release

On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>
wrote:

> Hi Everyone,
>
> On Oct 20, 2016, at 10:50 AM, Umair Shahid <umair(dot)shahid(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 8:47 PM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>
> wrote:
>
>>
>> On Oct 19, 2016, at 11:13 AM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Oct 19, 2016, at 11:12 AM, Umair Shahid <umair(dot)shahid(at)gmail(dot)com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> > On Oct 18, 2016, at 6:35 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On 10/18/2016 02:50 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>> Oh, also: 9.1 is EOL as of this release.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> There are several big fixes in this release, including a
>>> data-corruption
>>> >>> one for 9.6.
>>> >>
>>> >> Sounds like it will be a fun writeup. Looking forward to getting the
>>> >> specific feature list.
>>> >
>>> > Well, whoever is going to be doing this should be going out on hackers
>>> > now and figuring out what the big fixes are. That's frankly most of
>>> the
>>> > work -- well, that and the list of minor fixes, which will come on its
>>> > own on Monday.
>>>
>>> Per Tom on the -hackers thread, he advised waiting for the release
>>> notes. Heikki identified the two major things.
>>>
>>> Would you recommended drafting the notes in the wiki or in the “press”
>>> repo or put it in a thread?
>>>
>>
>> FYI, I have added a template named update_201610.md under the
>> /update_releases/current in the press repo.
>>
>>
>> Found this. I am going to start filling in details. Do I have push
>> writes to the repo?
>>
>>
>> Answer is yes.
>>
>> Because this is my first time doing this, I want to work on it early and
>> often to get into the proper cadence :-) I took a try at writing up the
>> data corruption issue as well as adding the EOL language:
>>
>> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=commitdiff;
>> h=38aadd18e9c64f30423f81920381b001fff8b4c5;hp=1ada1db63eaed9
>> 4e499c1289e90bdf70a47f9fc0
>>
>> I understand part of the challenge is taking the detailed commit notes
>> and putting it into language that makes sense to the users, which is why I
>> want more eyes on this. I intend to fill out more details once the rest of
>> the release notes are out, but if there are major issues I find it prudent
>> that we get the language for that correct so users understand the
>> ramifications and the need to upgrade.
>>
>
> I have pushed a few changes.
>
>
> I reviewed Tom’s release notes and changed the major issues per how he
> prioritized them (Umair: I removed your description for the crash issue as
> that was not prioritized in the release notes). I also filled out other
> fixes included in the release as well as the post-release instructions. I
> also incorporated Justin’s feedback and removed run-ons.
>
> https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=blob;f=
> update_releases/current/update_201610.md;h=f76a5eaaef2a030a8e1c472618a00f
> f66571f1f3;hb=7cd3c633b13f241db0a258dd9cd6f0aaa436531f
>

2nd sentence in section "Bug Fixes and Improvements" starts with:

*"Some of these issues affect only version 9.6.1"*

Shouldn't it say version 9.6?

>
> Do you think we should highlight the DISTINCT aggregate crashes? It
> seemed it was more important to highlight the potential data corruption
> vectors.
>
> Per Josh’s timeline, the next step is to send it to -hackers for feedback,
> but I wanted to share with this group first before doing so.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jonathan
>