public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: bubblboy <[email protected]>
To: Andrew Hammond <[email protected]>
Cc: Magnus Hagander <[email protected]>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: should we have a separate page that clearly defines what a minor release is and why it's a good idea to keep up with them?
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 19:43:00 +0100
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>

Andrew Hammond wrote:
 > On 2/21/07, Magnus Hagander <[email protected]> wrote:
 >> > > > I think adding to the FAQ is the best solution.  What additional
 >> > > > information to we need there?
 >> > >
 >> > > I think it's important enough (and unclear enough to a lot of 
people)
 >> > > that it shuold have it's own non-FAQ section. Either as a page 
on the
 >> > > website or as a page in the documentation.
 >> >
 >> > If you look at the developer documentation, you will see I overhauled
 >> > the instructions for upgrading a minor release:
 >> >
 >> > 
http://momjian.us/main/writings/pgsql/sgml/install-upgrading.html
 >> >
 >> > I think that would be a good place to add more text.  What additional
 >> > text do we need?  Something about how you are less likely to hit a new
 >> > bug if you minor upgrade than if you stay on an older release?
 >>
 >> Something about how we put only critical fixes in back branches, and not
 >> new features. How we *really* recommend that people should always be on
 >> the latest release in a branch. How we will never (knowingly) change the
 >> behaviour of anything in a back branch (without being *very* clear in
 >> the release notes of what and why). More focus on how easy that part is.
 >>
 >> Mainly, I think people don't upgrade because (a) they don't know what
 >> they gain, and (b) they're scared something will break. We need to
 >> counter those two arguments.
 >
 > I think this exactly defines what I'm looking for. The most basic
 > approach to risk management is "if it works, don't change it". What
 > I'm looking for is something with which to convince people that the
 > risk of breakage is so low that it's outweighed by the risk of
 > remaining exposed to bugs which haven't caused them problems yet.
 >
 > Andrew

There is one thing I don't understand in this whole discussion; this
upgrading, it is not specific to PostgreSQL, is it? Is there not a page
somewhere on the web that already extensively discusses this issue, no
matter what the program is? "You should always upgrade because blah
blah", I ca not imagine nobody wrote such an article yet. And if not;
write one yourself :) Maybe linking to that article from the postgresql
documentation, if the need is felt...

Just my thoughts on this matter,
b^4

view thread (32+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: should we have a separate page that clearly defines what a minor release is and why it's a good idea to keep up with them?
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox