Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.191]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50FA12E351B for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2007 03:02:09 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.191]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 51673-02 for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2007 03:02:04 -0400 (AST) Received: from lists.commandprompt.com (host-159.commandprompt.net [207.173.203.159]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0C592E34F7 for ; Thu, 6 Dec 2007 03:02:03 -0400 (AST) Received: from [192.168.1.226] (or-69-34-217-90.sta.embarqhsd.net [69.34.217.90]) (authenticated bits=0) by lists.commandprompt.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id lB6722U0011820 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 5 Dec 2007 23:02:02 -0800 Message-ID: <47579E72.1000602@commandprompt.com> Date: Wed, 05 Dec 2007 23:02:10 -0800 From: "Joshua D. Drake" Organization: Command Prompt, Inc. User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.13 (Windows/20070809) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Lane CC: Alvaro Herrera , pgsql-docs@postgresql.org Subject: Re: release notes.. added stefan References: <20071205123745.68fa66da@commandprompt.com> <20071205222514.GE10096@alvh.no-ip.org> <4044.1196918902@sss.pgh.pa.us> <47579A87.8030903@commandprompt.com> <5094.1196923876@sss.pgh.pa.us> In-Reply-To: <5094.1196923876@sss.pgh.pa.us> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (lists.commandprompt.com [207.173.203.159]); Wed, 05 Dec 2007 23:02:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Archive-Number: 200712/21 X-Sequence-Number: 4689 Tom Lane wrote: > "Joshua D. Drake" writes: >> Tom Lane wrote: >>> It might be worth reminding folks that the release notes do not >>> exist for the purpose of mentioning contributors. > >> Then why do we mention them at all in the release notes? > > You've got the motivation backwards. We mention the responsible > (blameworthy?) persons when describing a change that users might > find interesting. We don't insert release-note entries that users > wouldn't find interesting, just for the purpose of mentioning who > did it. Which seemed to me to be mostly the point of your proposed > addition. You are correct that would be why I submitted it. My motivation may have been backward based on the above definition but I assure you when people are looking at the release notes they are not looking to see who is responsible in the sense you are mentioning. Most are looking for recognition. I would never have considered your reasoning above. When someone puts a concerted effort to provide a better user experience for our number one used client (psql) and they aren't mentioned in the release notes, that to me would be an oversight worth adjustment. Of course that assumes we are on the same page for what the mention in the release notes is for, which we aren't :). Sincerely, Joshua D. Drake