Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Alvaro Herrera wrote:
>
>> Yeah. In my opinion, we're not really looking for 100% fairness. I
>> think credit is important, so if Stefan Kaltenbrunner did some psql
>> autocomplete work and it's not attributed, let's add a note to that
>> effect. There is no point in saying exactly how many lines he
>> contributed, nor listing the exact changes he did, though.
>
> Then we should remove exactly how many lines, or listings of exact changes
> any developer did.
We don't list that for anyone. That's precisely my point. We just put
the name of the person next to each release note item.
We don't say "worked on improving the backend" and then plaster 100
names, because we need a reasonable level of detail. But at the same
time we needn't mention that such-and-such command got tab completion on
psql, because as Bruce says, it is expected that all our commands have
it.
> Alternatively we could use the contributors list (currently developers
> list) as the definitive source and just provide a link.
I think that's a bad idea, because it doesn't keep historical
information. Furthermore it seems inactive people is removed
eventually, which doesn't happen with release notes.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.PlanetPostgreSQL.org/
"On the other flipper, one wrong move and we're Fatal Exceptions"
(T.U.X.: Term Unit X - http://www.thelinuxreview.com/TUX/)
