Robert Haas wrote:
> > Bottom line: ?I need to start the release notes today --- I can hack my
> > own version and we can revisit this later, which I am afraid will be in
> > one year, or we can just add what I have and we can keep hacking on it
> > as needed.
>
> The release note generation is tied to you because you're the guy who
> writes the release notes, not for any tools reason. You seem to
> believe that someone else would want the flags; I don't believe that
> at all. I would do the whole thing differently; the need for these
> particular things is because Bruce wants to do it a certain way, not
> because that's the only way to do it. I'm happy to add flags to
> git_changelog that are potentially useful to more than one person, but
> I don't think you've demonstrated that's the case here, which is why I
> think you maintaining your own version is perfectly fine and
> appropriate.
I believe I was clear why the reverse order is needed (progressive
commits), and the author goes at the end of the release note item, hence
my flag to move it. I can hack up something to move the author but it
seems much easier in the tool, and I do believe having the author where
it will appear in our release notes is helpful, unless we are thinking
of changing the format of our release notes.
Does someone else want to generate the major release notes this time?
At this point I will just make my own version and if someone else needs
flags, _they_ can add them and argue about them.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
