Message-ID: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-4075-c4520356020@github.com>
From: "sehrope (@sehrope)" <noreply+sehrope@github.com>
To: "pgjdbc/pgjdbc" <noreply+pgjdbc-pgjdbc@github.com>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2026 16:04:10 +0000
Subject: Re: [pgjdbc/pgjdbc] PR #4075: docs: restructure site, compatibility page, changelog-driven releases
In-Reply-To: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-4075@github.com>
References: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-4075@github.com>
List-Id: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc.github.com>
X-GitHub-Author-Login: sehrope
X-GitHub-Comment-Id: 4520356020
X-GitHub-Comment-Type: issue_comment
X-GitHub-Issue: 4075
X-GitHub-Repo: pgjdbc/pgjdbc
X-GitHub-Type: comment
X-GitHub-Url: https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/pull/4075#issuecomment-4520356020
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

I'd strongly suggest we close this PR so that whatever is going to be reviewed stands on its own. The rest of the commentary in this thread is not relevant and would only be distracting.

I'd also suggest getting feedback and acceptance on new code additions (e.g., the enum stuff and it's code processor to generate docs) before going down a rabbit hole of building and running it. That way you don't feel like been a waste of time if the idea itself is shot down.

Finally, if you're going to present this as something for others to review, get rid of the sausage factory of LLM commits and structure it into logical chunks that you would expect from a human. I don't care if you use AI to write code. But I'm not going to step through 100+ "`phase 1a: refactor the flubber thingamabob`" with multi paragraph meaningless commit messages. You need to squash it down to something presentable before opening a PR. This dump everything on reviewers approach is not going to work.