From: Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>
Message-Id: <200407260143.i6Q1heT05327@candle.pha.pa.us>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] 7.5 release notes
In-Reply-To: <1090805507.3057.2129.camel@localhost.localdomain>
To: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 21:43:40 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
	PostgreSQL-documentation <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Simon Riggs wrote:
> >  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.
> :)

I wasn't suggesting yours were dishonest.  I was saying that I was
aiming for the clearest style whether is makes PostgreSQL look good or
not.  I figured saying "in the past you had to do X" was clearer than
saying "you don't have to do X anymore".

I am, of course, am open to the community's feedback on this.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073