Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2019 18:46:14 -0500
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: "Jonathan S. Katz" <jkatz@postgresql.org>,
	Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>,
	Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>,
	pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Release note trimming: another modest proposal
Message-ID: <20190125234614.GH13803@momjian.us>
References: <19252.1533509841@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <fa460b8a-e581-ee7c-0118-a89f7b9e1cf9@2ndquadrant.com>
 <CABUevEzX3dq-uUeMR0mSnCj4B6TK3v4QuQKKsf6Oz+ZdyRHMZg@mail.gmail.com>
 <cbd4aeb5-2d9c-8b84-e968-9e09393d4c83@postgresql.org>
 <20190125233111.GE13803@momjian.us>
 <16080.1548459680@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <16080.1548459680@sss.pgh.pa.us>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 06:41:20PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > I assume this means we would only keep the current release notes in the
> > git tree too, e.g. 11.0, 11.1, 11.2, etc.
> 
> Yeah, I'd imagine that each branch would have just its own release notes.
> 
> I'm not sure whether to apply this policy retroactively to the supported
> back branches or just establish it going forward.  Maintaining the notes
> could be pretty confusing for the next few years if we do the latter,
> though.

Agreed.  We would need to backpatch.

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

+ As you are, so once was I.  As I am, so you will be. +
+                      Ancient Roman grave inscription +