Feedback-ID: ia2694551:Fastmail
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2022 18:20:22 +0100
From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>,
	Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>,
	Simon Riggs <simon.riggs@enterprisedb.com>,
	Robert Treat <rob@xzilla.net>, Erik Rijkers <er@xs4all.nl>,
	Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>,
	PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: New docs chapter on Transaction Management and related changes
Message-ID: <20221130172022.yxtohqbzvosa4f7g@alvherre.pgsql>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <Y4dgF4CeFUY35U2T@momjian.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/20221130172022.yxtohqbzvosa4f7g%40alvherre.pgsql>
Precedence: bulk

On 2022-Nov-30, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 30, 2022 at 07:33:44AM +0100, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> > On 30.11.22 02:51, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > > Patch applied back to PG 11.  Thanks to Simon for getting this important
> > > information in our docs, and for the valuable feedback from others that
> > > made this even better.
> > 
> > I request that the backpatching of this be reverted.  We don't want to have
> > major chapter numbers in the documentation changing between minor releases.
> 
> Uh, how do others feel about this?  I wanted to get this information to
> all our supported releases as soon as possible, rather than waiting for
> PG 16 and for people to upgrade.

I find it a bit shocking to have had it backpatched, even to 15 -- a
whole chapter in the documentation?  I don't see why it wouldn't be
treated like any other "major feature" patch, which we only consider for
the development branch.  Also, this is a first cut -- presumably we'll
want to copy-edit it before it becomes released material.

Now, keep in mind that not having it backpatched does not mean that it
is invisible to users.  It is definitely visible, if they use the doc
URL with /devel/ in it.  And this information has been missing for 20+
years, how come it is so urgent to have it everywhere now?

I agree that it should be reverted from all branches other than master.

-- 
Álvaro Herrera        Breisgau, Deutschland  —  https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/