MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <ae4eb804-517d-4811-bfae-bddd1f7b7556@postgresql.org>
 <CA+TgmoZH4xH1c_epxx_+UdDnyBRi4C5Skcx2NiuyxQaNf5Egtw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+TgmoZH4xH1c_epxx_+UdDnyBRi4C5Skcx2NiuyxQaNf5Egtw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jacob Champion <champion.p@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2026 15:12:11 -0700
Message-ID: 
 <CAGu=u8he0PxWACHh+1QjNFQ5FwfJ2je-KLVfM41XyvW7svKQnw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: PostgreSQL 19 beta 1 release announcement draft
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>,
	PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy@lists.postgresql.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAGu%3Du8he0PxWACHh%2B1QjNFQ5FwfJ2je-KLVfM41XyvW7svKQnw%40mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, May 28, 2026 at 8:23=E2=80=AFPM Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.=
org> wrote:
> Attached is the draft of the PostgreSQL 19 Beta 1 release announcement.
> Please review for accuracy (e.g. are features described correctly? Did I
> miss a revert), recommendations on additions or glaring omissions,
> structure, etc.

I think the beta announcement should probably reference the grease
campaign [1], since it'll only be conducted during 19beta, and we want
to encourage testers to try to find and report failures. I don't know
if that should be in the Testing section, or on the beta page of the
site, or somewhere else.

On Fri, May 29, 2026 at 9:46=E2=80=AFAM Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>=
 wrote:
> I also understand that gets
> into tough arguments about what's actually worth mentioning, which are
> inevitably subjective. Still, I'd suggest as a zero-order guideline
> that including things that are <~ 500 LOC is more likely to be clutter
> than a true headline feature.

If we're looking to streamline, I'll be the first to offer up
PQAUTHDATA_OAUTH_BEARER_TOKEN_V2 for the chopping block. :D
Alternatively, it could be pulled into a generic summary in the Other
Highlights section, like "OAuth support has received several
quality-of-life improvements for client and server developers" (which
also credits the other community contributions in that area, some of
which are more substantial than the new flow type).

If we do keep it where it is, I think "structured error message
specification" should be replaced with something like "custom error
messages". The structured-error wording makes me think of things like
error templates and JSON.

Thanks!
--Jacob

[1] https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Grease