> On 23 Oct 2025, at 03:04, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:
> * Going through 0001:
>
> - description: automatic invalidation of cached exceutions plans
> + description: automatic invalidation of cached executions plans
>
> should probably be "cached execution plans". Otherwise LGTM.
Fixed
> * Going through 0002:
>
> - - name: IN/OUT/INOUT parameters for pl/pgsql and PL/SQL
> + - name: IN/OUT/INOUT parameters for PL/pgSQL and PL/SQL
>
> We should probably not call it "PL/SQL" since it's not a procedural language. Perhaps:
>
> - - name: IN/OUT/INOUT parameters for pl/pgsql and PL/SQL
> + - name: IN/OUT/INOUT parameters for PL/pgSQL and SQL stored functions
Fixed
>> The featurematrix was a rabbithole that went deep, looking closer I realized
>> that links were using a variety of target versions: /current/, /devel/, or the
>> version which was current at the time of adding. This means that for old
>> features we we still linking to the 9.x version of the docs, which clearly
>> isn't helpful to our users. We also had quite a few /static/ links which 301
>> redirects since we don't have that level anymore.
>
> There were some reasons for this, the "version at the time of adding" ensuring that the links were accessible during
thebeta period (which also explained some of the /devel/, which I likely did). During the beta period, we'll still need
touse the `/NN/` number so the links are accessible, but we can make it part of the procedure to more to `/current/`
whenwe GA.
That makes a lot of sense. We also need to use the /NN/ number for any feature
which is removed, to stabilise the link on the last version where it was
present.
Adding a "link-refresh" step to the GA checklist sounds like a good idea (and I
can volunteer to tackle it next time).
--
Daniel Gustafsson
