On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 10:27:41AM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 10:56 PM, Jeff Janes <jeff.janes@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 04:26:48PM -0800, Jeff Janes wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 3:42 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> > We don't assume people are reading docs from very old versions.
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> Even if that is the version they are using? It is, after all, still
> >>> under maintenance,
> >>
> >> There are three options for doc patches:
> >>
> >> 1. patch only git head, meaning the next major release
> >> 2. do #1, plus the most recent major released version, e.g. 9.2.X
> >> 3. #1, #2, and all major supported released versions
> >>
> >> In general, #1 is normally for wording clarifications, #2 is for usage
> >> clarifications, and #3 is to correct mistakes. Not sure I follow that
> >> 100%, but that is what I normally do.
> >>
> >> Is that process good? Did I not follow it?
> >
> > It was removed from 9.0 because it was considered to be unreliable. I
> > think that unreliable advice about taking backups is a mistake, so it
> > should have followed path #3. I guess it is also clarification, but a
> > pretty major one.
>
> I think it can be considered a bugfix, and thus correcting a mistake.
>
> But in generael, I think we may want to be a bit more aggressive in
> backpatching these things. First because people will likely read the
> docs for the version that they are using, and thus miss things. But
> possibly even more important, because we know that Google (and others)
> tend to link to older versions of the docs as search hits before the
> newer ones for quite a long time after a release (or forever in some
> cases), which makes it even more visible.
See my new email; it doesn't appear in 8.4, and I probably checked that
at the time.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
