From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Message-Id: <201110121757.p9CHvAn15219@momjian.us>
Subject: Re: Document DELETE/UPDATE command tag vs triggers
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+TgmobLXHi9yu-JjSMceojxO+idK8XjdiNm4x1XB0bSL7En1Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 13:57:10 -0400 (EDT)
CC: Marti Raudsepp <marti@juffo.org>,
	Heikki Linnakangas <heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com>,
	pgsql-docs <pgsql-docs@postgresql.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"

Robert Haas wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 4:39 AM, Marti Raudsepp <marti@juffo.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 19:58, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Committed.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Do you think it should be backported to earlier versions too? As it
> > stands, the documentation is misleading.
> 
> Well, I committed about five doc patches that day, and I had to decide
> for each one whether it was worth back-patching, and if so whether it
> was worth back-patching all the way or just to 9.1.  (We typically
> back-patch things to all applicable versions or not at all, but for
> doc changes sometimes we go back exactly one release so that it will
> make its way onto the most current version of the web site docs a
> little bit more quickly.)  I decided against back-patching this one,
> on the theory that we make many documentation improvements over the
> course of every major release cycle, and back-patching all of them
> creates more work for translators than can really be justified by the
> small number of people who read older versions of the documentation.
> It's an arguable point, of course, and I wouldn't have objected if
> someone else had chosen differently.

I agree with your analysis.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + It's impossible for everything to be true. +