X-Original-To: pgsql-docs-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.144]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F7CAD1B1C9; Sun, 25 Jul 2004 22:32:20 -0300 (ADT) Received: from svr1.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 96110-02; Mon, 26 Jul 2004 01:32:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk (cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk [195.92.195.171]) by svr1.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36CCAD1B76F; Sun, 25 Jul 2004 22:32:15 -0300 (ADT) Received: from modem-2916.lemur.dialup.pol.co.uk ([217.135.139.100] helo=[192.168.0.102]) by cmailg1.svr.pol.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1BouLi-0002tD-LK; Mon, 26 Jul 2004 02:32:18 +0100 Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 7.5 release notes From: Simon Riggs To: Bruce Momjian Cc: PostgreSQL-development , PostgreSQL-documentation In-Reply-To: <200407252355.i6PNtoc13198@candle.pha.pa.us> References: <200407252355.i6PNtoc13198@candle.pha.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: 2nd Quadrant Message-Id: <1090805507.3057.2129.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2) Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 02:31:47 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 tagged_above=0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_SORBS X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200407/50 X-Sequence-Number: 2458 On Mon, 2004-07-26 at 00:55, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Simon Riggs wrote: > > On Sun, 2004-07-25 at 05:25, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > > I have completed the 7.5 release notes. You can view them in HTML on > > > the developer web page. I have marked a few items with question marks > > > that need to be addressed. I am looking for improvements, even minor > > > ones. Either send in a patch or committers can modify the file > > > directly. > > > > > > > Those were just examples of a suggested style change for some items. > Basically, my goal with these release notes is to make it as clear as > possible why this new feature would be valuable to the reader. Completely Agree. > If it makes our previous release look bad, so be it. Oh. > For me, clarity and > candor gain a lot more credibility than trying to cover over missing > functionality in the past. I am not saying we have to be so honest that > we bash PostgreSQL, but in cases where we adjust wording to try to > prevent ourselves from looking bad, it is best to be honest and clear > about our limitations. I think in the long run it gains us lots of > credibility (and ultimately volunteers). > I see this as merely a half-full/half-empty viewpoint issue. Honesty and clarity are wonderful things and I subscribe to them. Using them only to describe your own viewpoint is not a reasonable point to make in a hopefully rational discussion about writing style... I'll go back to my docs now, but I guess we may relive this again when you see some of the honest, clear and positive changes I am suggesting. :) -- Best Regards, Simon Riggs