To: Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
cc: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: "Release date" for aborted releases? 
In-reply-to: <200806211110.38614.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> 
References: <21335.1212858177@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	<200806211110.38614.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
Comments: In-reply-to Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net>
	message dated "Sat, 21 Jun 2008 11:10:37 -0400"
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2008 12:13:33 -0400
Message-ID: <19481.1214064813@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

Robert Treat <xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> writes:
> On Saturday 07 June 2008 13:02:57 Tom Lane wrote:
>> I am wondering whether to leave the release note pages for 8.3.2, 8.2.8,
>> etc saying "Release date: 2008-06-09", or to change them to something
>> like "Never released".  Thoughts?

> At the time, I didn't think anything of this, but was reading through the 
> 8.2.x release notes yesterday and the above now feels like an inconsistency 
> with what was done with 8.2.2, which we gave an official release date,  and 
> the subsequent 8.2.3, which was released 2 days later. Now, I supposed 8.2.2 
> was further in the release process, but it was pretty much DOA as well. 

Well, those cases were different, in that the public announcements had
already gone out.  This time was the first time we've ever pulled back
a release prior to announcement. If you read "release date" as meaning
"date of formal announcement email", then "never released" is exactly
the right thing, because you will find no email announcing those
releases in the pgsql-announce archives.

			regards, tom lane