pg.ddx.io pgsql-docs@postgresql.org mailing list archive
help / color / mirror / Atom feed9.1 release notes
7+ messages / 3 participants
[nested] [flat]
* 9.1 release notes
@ 2011-03-20 04:13 Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Momjian @ 2011-03-20 04:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: pgsql-docs
I have completed and committed my draft of the 9.1 release notes. They
will be continually updated and improved as we reach final release.
What information should we take from the alpha release notes, and do we
feel the alpha release notes are close enough to the ones I drafted that
we can try avoiding my full release note generation in the future?
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: 9.1 release notes
@ 2011-03-24 21:02 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
parent: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Robert Haas @ 2011-03-24 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>; +Cc: pgsql-docs
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> I have completed and committed my draft of the 9.1 release notes. They
> will be continually updated and improved as we reach final release.
>
> What information should we take from the alpha release notes, and do we
> feel the alpha release notes are close enough to the ones I drafted that
> we can try avoiding my full release note generation in the future?
I took a crack at moving the useful details from the alpha release
notes into the regular ones, which I do believe are better overall
than the alpha ones. Feel free to adjust as needed. At this point, I
think we should nuke the alpha release notes; I don't see any value in
having two versions around.
In terms of future releases, I think we'd probably need to work a bit
harder on the alpha release notes if we want to avoid the full release
note generation process. That may be a good thing for us to consider
in the future, but at least for this release I'd say we weren't quite
there.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: 9.1 release notes
@ 2011-03-24 21:27 Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
parent: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Bruce Momjian @ 2011-03-24 21:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>; +Cc: pgsql-docs
Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> > I have completed and committed my draft of the 9.1 release notes. ?They
> > will be continually updated and improved as we reach final release.
> >
> > What information should we take from the alpha release notes, and do we
> > feel the alpha release notes are close enough to the ones I drafted that
> > we can try avoiding my full release note generation in the future?
>
> I took a crack at moving the useful details from the alpha release
> notes into the regular ones, which I do believe are better overall
> than the alpha ones. Feel free to adjust as needed. At this point, I
> think we should nuke the alpha release notes; I don't see any value in
> having two versions around.
Agreed.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: 9.1 release notes
@ 2011-03-24 21:38 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
parent: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Robert Haas @ 2011-03-24 21:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>; +Cc: pgsql-docs
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>> > I have completed and committed my draft of the 9.1 release notes. ?They
>> > will be continually updated and improved as we reach final release.
>> >
>> > What information should we take from the alpha release notes, and do we
>> > feel the alpha release notes are close enough to the ones I drafted that
>> > we can try avoiding my full release note generation in the future?
>>
>> I took a crack at moving the useful details from the alpha release
>> notes into the regular ones, which I do believe are better overall
>> than the alpha ones. Feel free to adjust as needed. At this point, I
>> think we should nuke the alpha release notes; I don't see any value in
>> having two versions around.
>
> Agreed.
Should we temporarily move the general disclaimers about alpha
releases into the main release notes, since I think we're going to
wrap alpha5 on Monday?
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: 9.1 release notes
@ 2011-03-25 04:53 Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
parent: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Tom Lane @ 2011-03-25 04:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>; +Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>; pgsql-docs
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> In terms of future releases, I think we'd probably need to work a bit
> harder on the alpha release notes if we want to avoid the full release
> note generation process. That may be a good thing for us to consider
> in the future, but at least for this release I'd say we weren't quite
> there.
To my mind, one of the core ideas about the alpha releases was to be
able to pop them out with minimal overhead. It's *already* the case
that generating release notes is the most expensive part of the alpha
release process --- in fact, I'd venture that it's 90% or more of the
effort, just to produce the kind of notes we've produced for the past
alphas. I can't see that we're going to put significantly more effort
than that into them.
regards, tom lane
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: 9.1 release notes
@ 2011-03-25 15:38 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
parent: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Robert Haas @ 2011-03-25 15:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; +Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>; pgsql-docs
On Fri, Mar 25, 2011 at 12:53 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> In terms of future releases, I think we'd probably need to work a bit
>> harder on the alpha release notes if we want to avoid the full release
>> note generation process. That may be a good thing for us to consider
>> in the future, but at least for this release I'd say we weren't quite
>> there.
>
> To my mind, one of the core ideas about the alpha releases was to be
> able to pop them out with minimal overhead. It's *already* the case
> that generating release notes is the most expensive part of the alpha
> release process --- in fact, I'd venture that it's 90% or more of the
> effort, just to produce the kind of notes we've produced for the past
> alphas. I can't see that we're going to put significantly more effort
> than that into them.
I make no judgement on that one way or the other; you may well be
right. I'm merely saying that IF we want to not need to redo the
process at the end, THEN we have to put more effort in earlier.
Whether that will ever happen or whether it would be good I don't care
to pontificate on just now.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: 9.1 release notes
@ 2011-03-25 15:53 Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
parent: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Robert Haas @ 2011-03-25 15:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>; +Cc: pgsql-docs
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 5:27 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>> Robert Haas wrote:
>>> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
>>> > I have completed and committed my draft of the 9.1 release notes. ?They
>>> > will be continually updated and improved as we reach final release.
>>> >
>>> > What information should we take from the alpha release notes, and do we
>>> > feel the alpha release notes are close enough to the ones I drafted that
>>> > we can try avoiding my full release note generation in the future?
>>>
>>> I took a crack at moving the useful details from the alpha release
>>> notes into the regular ones, which I do believe are better overall
>>> than the alpha ones. Feel free to adjust as needed. At this point, I
>>> think we should nuke the alpha release notes; I don't see any value in
>>> having two versions around.
>>
>> Agreed.
>
> Should we temporarily move the general disclaimers about alpha
> releases into the main release notes, since I think we're going to
> wrap alpha5 on Monday?
Bruce thought this approach made sense, so done.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
^ permalink raw reply [nested|flat] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-03-25 15:53 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox mbox.gz follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-03-20 04:13 9.1 release notes Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
2011-03-24 21:02 ` Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
2011-03-24 21:27 ` Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
2011-03-24 21:38 ` Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
2011-03-25 15:53 ` Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
2011-03-25 04:53 ` Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
2011-03-25 15:38 ` Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox