On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 02:17:25PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 10:10:23AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> >> What I would be opposed to is continuing to list the original authors in
> >> the release notes and putting reviewers, testers, co-authors, etc. on a
> >> separate web page. If we're gonna move people, let's move *all* of
> >> them. Also, it needs to be on something more trustworthy than the wiki,
> >> like maybe putting it at postgresql.org/developers/9.3/
>
> > I think you will have trouble keeping those two lists synchronized. I
> > think you will need to create a release note document that includes all
> > names, then copy that to a website and remove the names just before the
> > release is packaged.
>
> Unless Bruce is doing more work than I think he is, the attribution data
> going into the release notes is just coming from whatever the committer
> said in the commit log message. I believe that we've generally been
Yes, that's all I do. "Bruce is doing more work than I think he is"
gave me a chuckle. ;-)
> careful to credit the patch author, but I'm less confident that everyone
> who merited a "review credit" always gets mentioned --- that would
> require going through the entire review thread at commit time, and I for
> one can't say that I do that.
>
> If we're going to try harder to ensure that reviewers are credited,
> it'd probably be better to take both the commit log and the release
> notes out of that loop.
I assume you are suggesting we _not_ use the commit log and release
notes for reviewer credit. Good point; we might be able to pull that
from the commit-fest app, though you then need to match that with the
release note text.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ It's impossible for everything to be true. +
