Re: Do we accept doc changes to back branches? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Stephen Frost
Subject Re: Do we accept doc changes to back branches?
Date
Msg-id 20171127181703.GY4628@tamriel.snowman.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Do we accept doc changes to back branches?  ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Greetings,

* Joshua D. Drake (jd@commandprompt.com) wrote:
> I don't recall, do we allow non-bug fix (or what constitutes a bug)
> for back branches with docs? I have been reviewing the logical
> replication docs and they could use some love but I need to know
> which branch I should start work on.

The short answer, I believe, is to always start with master because we
certainly want doc fixes to be included in the next release (assuming
that documentation exists in master...  if it doesn't then start with
the latest release it's in).  Following that, patches for prior branches
are certainly welcome where they improve the documentation in a
meaningful way.  A good example is Dean's recent improvements on the RLS
documentation by adding a table which lists out the privileges and
policies matrix that RLS follows.

See commit 87c2a17fee784c7e1004ba3d3c5d8147da676783.

Thanks!

Stephen

pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "Joshua D. Drake"
Date:
Subject: Do we accept doc changes to back branches?
Next
From: Jesper Pedersen
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] path toward faster partition pruning