On 2015-06-29 17:05:59 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> +1. Helps confirm which items are meant to correspond to which commits.
That's what made me think of it.
> In case you didn't realize it already, the stuff I put into the minor
> release notes is from src/tools/git_changelog. Dunno whether we need
> to use that exact format for major releases though; there's no need to
> identify branches in major release notes.
I'd recognized the format, but I didn't want to exactly go that way. As
you say, the branch information is redundant.
Haven't yet thought much about the format, maybe in the style of
git log --pretty='format:[%h] %aN [%ci]: %s' upstream/master
I'd personally like to see the hash and the time, the rest isn't
particularly important to me.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
