On Sun, Feb 1, 2015 at 11:10 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I think it's time we changed the policy of including all release notes
> back to the beginning in Appendix E. I seem to recall we debated this
> once before, and decided that we liked having all that project history
> visible. But Release 6.0 is old enough to vote as of last week, so really
> we no longer need to prove anything about project stability/longevity.
>
> I propose that we go over to a policy of keeping in HEAD only release
> notes for actively maintained branches, and that each back branch should
> retain notes only for branches that were actively maintained when it split
> off from HEAD. This would keep about five years worth of history in
> Appendix E, which should be a roughly stable amount of text.
-1. I find it very useful to be able to go back through all the
release notes using grep, and have done so on multiple occasions. It
sounds like this policy would make that harder, and I don't see what
we get out of of it. It doesn't bother me that the SGML documentation
of the release notes is big; disk space is cheap.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
