On 9/11/18 10:52 AM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
> On 9/11/18 10:39 AM, Stephen Frost wrote:
>> Greetings,
>>
>> * Jonathan S. Katz (jkatz@postgresql.org) wrote:
>>> I think we are saying similar things though...the content of the page
>>> needs some hierarchical restructuring, and yes, I'm convinced of some
>>> language cleanups as well.
>>>
>>> To make it more tangible, I'm happy to propose a patch in a few.
>>
>> The point I was getting at is that we don't just need a patch here- our
>> current EOL policy is really quite vague and confusing. Trying to
>> reword that confusing and vague policy doesn't change that it's
>> confusing and vague- to deal with that, we need to actually change the
>> policy, which is what I'm advocating for here.
>
> We're saying the same thing. I just wanted to have something in writing
> so it's more tangible and easier to discuss.
Please see attached patch the includes the wording updates.
The one thing that is not included is making "EOL Month" => "Expected
Last Release" - currently this is set dynamically by "core.Version.eoldate"
AFAICT this is only used in one place, on this page, and perhaps we can
re-purpose it to reflect "Expected Last Release"
Otherwise, I'd recommend a new column that contains the expected last
release month.
Thanks,
Jonathan
