On 2/3/15 11:53 AM, Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
>> Note also that you only need to present the release notes from the
>> latest stable release branch on the web site, as opposed to
>> documentation for each branch.
>
> Yeah, JD suggested the same upthread. If we went over to a separate
> document containing all the historical notes, then it would make sense
> for the main documentation to contain only release notes for the current
> branch, which would further reduce its build time. My thread-starting
> proposal of keeping the last five branches was based on the assumption
> that we didn't need any whole-history document, but if we're keeping one
> separately then this seems to make the most sense.
I think that's not what I was trying to say. My proposal would be to
leave the source code in each branch exactly the same, but redefine the
documentation build to build two separate documents: one with the
documentation without any release notes, and one with all the release notes.
