Robert Haas wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote:
> >> Robert, ?this has been discussed many times before, and most people agree with
> >> you, but Bruce doesn't. I think the ony way this will change is if someone
> >> takes on the role of "release notes manager", subscrbes to pgsql-commits, and
> >> then starts updating a wiki page as each item is committed. Once other
> >> committers see that, I'm guessing they will start helping, and eventually
> >> Bruce will join in. Outside of that I think we're wasting our time on this.
> >
> > This is actually a good point regardless of Bruce. The run down is this:
> >
> > We have an individual that does stuff a certain way. That way works for
> > him. That individual is the one actually doing the work.
> >
> > We have other individuals who would like to do it a different way.
> >
> > I invite those individuals to do so. If there way proves to be more
> > efficient the community will move in that direction.
>
> Sadly, this approach seems to have a high percentage probability of
> being completely wasted effort. So I agree with Robert Treat: we're
> wasting our time on this. As I said upthread, I am still willing to
> help edit release notes, either now or most likely in the future, if
> there is a list of commits to start from (and although I may find it
> odd, Bruce feels it's the easier half of the job, so, fine). If that
> is helpful, great. If it's not, that's OK too.
So far taking the CVS logs and making a list of only the items we want
for the release notes took one day; researching and rewording the items
so they are ready for the release notes took five days; grouping them
into sections and rewording/combining, 1/2 a day, and adding SGML markup
will be another few hours.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
