On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 11:32:16AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > > Tom Lane wrote:
> > >> Personally I think it would be just fine if we had only the wiki copy
> > >> and forgot about shipping it in tarballs.
> >
> > > The problem with not shipping the TODO file at all is that TODO gives
> > > users a list of all known bugs/missing features in that major release.
> >
> > This seems to me to be nonsense. You've never maintained the
> > back-branch versions of the TODO list, so they're out of date anyway
> > --- ie, they don't account for problems discovered post-release.
>
> It is a best effort with our limited resources.
>
> > In any case I've always thought that the TODO was developer-oriented
> > documentation, not something users would read. If there's a shortcoming
> > in a feature, it ought to be documented in the SGML manual.
>
> It typically isn't, except for major issues, again due to lack of
> resources.
I think you will have to search for a long time to find anybody who
actually uses it like that. I'm willing to bet that well over 95% of the
people who read the TODO only read it on the website. (potentially
excluding the actual patch-contributors, but those aren't included in your
argument anyway)
//Magnus
