Subject: Re: Documenting removal of nonnullvalue() and friends
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Josh Kupershmidt <schmiddy@gmail.com>, pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=iZiPF88Zt46S35rs0RnvvMB86MoOfEBWD2bcB@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTikr84KaL_EQECtvfnKkq0f=abHi4s+9Cq7LSOSo@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikT01KcHaEfJRBepM6ZGncD59Sn1g9MEE-XPpWX@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=Av3AJ9DAyyO758OKabzEks-pNQWm=ntTMLHkH@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikH6JF0FrwJBDaYpUN_TW=3t=Syj3pnzJ7CX1-A@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=iZiPF88Zt46S35rs0RnvvMB86MoOfEBWD2bcB@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Thu, 14 Oct 2010 16:58:28 +0300
Message-ID: <1287064708.9532.3.camel@vanquo.pezone.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On tor, 2010-10-14 at 08:50 -0400, Robert Haas wrote:
> Still, I don't think it would be unreasonable to add a note to the
> prior-release documentation saying - hey, these functions exist.  They
> are for internal use only, and do not exist in later versions.  Don't
> use 'em.  Now, how many people will actually see that note?  Probably
> not many.  But it wouldn't bother me to have it there.

Just like there is a philosophical argument against changing the release
notes after the release, there is an argument against changing a past
release to "retroactively predict" how future releases behave.  We have
made exceptions to both points on occasion, but usually only for
critical upgrade-related issues.