Re: A user report of misinterpretation of 'unsupported versions' - Mailing list pgsql-docs

From Michael Nolan
Subject Re: A user report of misinterpretation of 'unsupported versions'
Date
Msg-id CAOzAquJu2P7Q71bwqTufePiWrwioogqXDRskzVqd5h2PECU=mg@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: A user report of misinterpretation of 'unsupported versions'  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: A user report of misinterpretation of 'unsupported versions'  (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>)
List pgsql-docs


On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 11:22 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:


In any case, if we do change the wording, I'd like to lobby again
for using "obsolete" rather than "unsupported" for EOL versions.
That seems less likely to be misinterpreted.

I suggested the following wording:

This page is for PostgreSQL version 9.2
For the equivalent page in other versions see:
Currently Supported Versions:  9.1,  9.0,  8.4
Unreleased or Development versions: 9.3, Devel
Older releases that are no longer being maintained: 8.3, 8.2, 8.1, 8.0

Yes, it is more verbose, but the web is one place where space is not at a premium, and this is (IMHO) far clearer for the casual reader.

A separate issue is, when 9.3 goes live or 8.4 goes EOL, do these pages automatically get moved to the 'supported' or 'not maintained' sections, respectively, or do all these pages have to be revised?
--
Mike Nolan

 

pgsql-docs by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: A user report of misinterpretation of 'unsupported versions'
Next
From: Magnus Hagander
Date:
Subject: Re: A user report of misinterpretation of 'unsupported versions'