Thread: list of acknowledgments for PG15
Attached is the plain-text list of acknowledgments for the PG15 release notes, current through REL_15_BETA4. Please check for problems such as wrong sorting, duplicate names in different variants, or names in the wrong order etc. (Note that the current standard is given name followed by surname, independent of cultural origin.)
Attachment
On Thu, 08 Sep 2022 at 20:13, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Attached is the plain-text list of acknowledgments for the PG15 release > notes, current through REL_15_BETA4. Please check for problems such as > wrong sorting, duplicate names in different variants, or names in the > wrong order etc. (Note that the current standard is given name followed > by surname, independent of cultural origin.) Hi, Peter Li Japin is an alias of Japin Li, it is unnecessary to list both of them. -- Regrads, Japin Li. ChengDu WenWu Information Technology Co.,Ltd.
On Thu, Sep 08, 2022 at 11:39:43PM +0800, Japin Li wrote:
>
> On Thu, 08 Sep 2022 at 20:13, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> > Attached is the plain-text list of acknowledgments for the PG15 release
> > notes, current through REL_15_BETA4. Please check for problems such as
> > wrong sorting, duplicate names in different variants, or names in the
> > wrong order etc. (Note that the current standard is given name followed
> > by surname, independent of cultural origin.)
>
> Hi, Peter
>
> Li Japin is an alias of Japin Li, it is unnecessary to list both of them.
Thanks. This script finds another name which seems to be duplicated:
awk '{print $1,$2; print $2,$1}' |sort |uniq -c |sort -nr |awk '$1>1'
2 Tang Haiying
2 Li Japin
2 Japin Li
2 Haiying Tang
Alternately: awk 'a[$2$1]{print} {a[$1$2]=1}'
--
Justin
On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 9:13 PM Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > Attached is the plain-text list of acknowledgments for the PG15 release > notes, current through REL_15_BETA4. Please check for problems such as > wrong sorting, duplicate names in different variants, or names in the > wrong order etc. (Note that the current standard is given name followed > by surname, independent of cultural origin.) Thanks as usual! I think these are Japanese names that are in the surname-followed-by-given-name order: Kamigishi Rei Kawamoto Masaya Okano Naoki Best regards, Etsuro Fujita
On 12.09.22 06:03, Etsuro Fujita wrote: > On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 9:13 PM Peter Eisentraut > <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> Attached is the plain-text list of acknowledgments for the PG15 release >> notes, current through REL_15_BETA4. Please check for problems such as >> wrong sorting, duplicate names in different variants, or names in the >> wrong order etc. (Note that the current standard is given name followed >> by surname, independent of cultural origin.) > > Thanks as usual! > > I think these are Japanese names that are in the > surname-followed-by-given-name order: > > Kamigishi Rei > Kawamoto Masaya > Okano Naoki committed with the provided corrections
On 2022/09/08 21:13, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > Attached is the plain-text list of acknowledgments for the PG15 release notes, current through REL_15_BETA4. Please checkfor problems such as wrong sorting, duplicate names in different variants, or names in the wrong order etc. (Note thatthe current standard is given name followed by surname, independent of cultural origin.) I'd propose to add "Tatsuhiro Nakamori" whose patch was back-patched to v15 last week, into the list. Thought? https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commitdiff;h=249b0409b181311bb1c375311e43eb767b5c3bdd Regards, -- Fujii Masao Advanced Computing Technology Center Research and Development Headquarters NTT DATA CORPORATION
Attachment
On 2022-Oct-07, Fujii Masao wrote: > On 2022/09/08 21:13, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > > > Attached is the plain-text list of acknowledgments for the PG15 release notes, current through REL_15_BETA4. Pleasecheck for problems such as wrong sorting, duplicate names in different variants, or names in the wrong order etc. (Note that the current standard is given name followed by surname, independent of cultural origin.) > > I'd propose to add "Tatsuhiro Nakamori" whose patch was back-patched to v15 last week, into the list. Thought? > > https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commitdiff;h=249b0409b181311bb1c375311e43eb767b5c3bdd I agree, he has made some other contributions in the list, even if his email does not yet show up in the git log. (I think it would be good to have people's full name when writing the commit messages, too ...) (Also: I think it would be nice to have people's names that are originally in scripts other than Latin to appear in both scripts.) -- Álvaro Herrera Breisgau, Deutschland — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org> writes:
> (Also: I think it would be nice to have people's names that are
> originally in scripts other than Latin to appear in both scripts.)
That'd move the goalposts for the docs toolchain rather a long way,
I fear.
As for the point originally made, I'm not sure whether Peter has a
consistent rule for which release cycle people get acknowledged in.
It may be that we're already into the time frame in which Nakamori-san
should be listed in PG v16 acknowledgments instead. I have no objection
to adding him if we're still in the v15 frame, though.
regards, tom lane
On 06.10.22 18:26, Fujii Masao wrote: > On 2022/09/08 21:13, Peter Eisentraut wrote: >> Attached is the plain-text list of acknowledgments for the PG15 >> release notes, current through REL_15_BETA4. Please check for >> problems such as wrong sorting, duplicate names in different variants, >> or names in the wrong order etc. (Note that the current standard is >> given name followed by surname, independent of cultural origin.) > > I'd propose to add "Tatsuhiro Nakamori" whose patch was back-patched to > v15 last week, into the list. Thought? They were added with the last update.
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com> writes:
> On 06.10.22 18:26, Fujii Masao wrote:
>> I'd propose to add "Tatsuhiro Nakamori" whose patch was back-patched to
>> v15 last week, into the list. Thought?
> They were added with the last update.
I don't wish to object to adding Nakamori-san here, but I feel like we
need a policy that doesn't require last-minute updates to release notes.
As far as I've understood, the idea is to credit people based on the
time frame in which their patches were committed, not on the branch(es)
that the patches were committed to. Otherwise we'd have to retroactively
add people to back-branch acknowledgements, and we have not been doing
that. So a patch that goes in during the v16 development cycle means
that the author should get acknowledged in the v16 release notes,
even if it got back-patched to older branches. What remains is to
define when is the cutoff point between "acknowledge in v15" versus
"acknowledge in v16". I don't have a strong opinion about that,
but I'd like it to be more than 24 hours before the 15.0 wrap.
Could we make the cutoff be, say, beta1?
regards, tom lane
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 02:41:06AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > I don't wish to object to adding Nakamori-san here, but I feel like we > need a policy that doesn't require last-minute updates to release notes. > > As far as I've understood, the idea is to credit people based on the > time frame in which their patches were committed, not on the branch(es) > that the patches were committed to. Otherwise we'd have to retroactively > add people to back-branch acknowledgements, and we have not been doing > that. So a patch that goes in during the v16 development cycle means > that the author should get acknowledged in the v16 release notes, > even if it got back-patched to older branches. What remains is to > define when is the cutoff point between "acknowledge in v15" versus > "acknowledge in v16". I don't have a strong opinion about that, > but I'd like it to be more than 24 hours before the 15.0 wrap. > Could we make the cutoff be, say, beta1? Is the issue that we are really only crediting people whose commits/work appears in major releases, and not in minor ones? -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Indecision is a decision. Inaction is an action. Mark Batterson
Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes:
> On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 02:41:06AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> As far as I've understood, the idea is to credit people based on the
>> time frame in which their patches were committed, not on the branch(es)
>> that the patches were committed to.
> Is the issue that we are really only crediting people whose commits/work
> appears in major releases, and not in minor ones?
What Peter has said about this is that he lists everyone whose name
has appeared in commit messages over thus-and-such a time frame.
So it doesn't matter which branch is involved, just when the contribution
was made. That process is fine with me; I'm just seeking a bit more
clarity as to what the time frames are.
regards, tom lane
On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 02:44:22PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> writes: > > On Mon, Oct 10, 2022 at 02:41:06AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> As far as I've understood, the idea is to credit people based on the > >> time frame in which their patches were committed, not on the branch(es) > >> that the patches were committed to. > > > Is the issue that we are really only crediting people whose commits/work > > appears in major releases, and not in minor ones? > > What Peter has said about this is that he lists everyone whose name > has appeared in commit messages over thus-and-such a time frame. > So it doesn't matter which branch is involved, just when the contribution > was made. That process is fine with me; I'm just seeking a bit more > clarity as to what the time frames are. Oh, that's an interesting approach but it might mean that, for example, PG 16 patch authors appear in the PG 15 major release notes. It seems that the stable major release branch date should be the cut-off, so no one is missed. -- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> https://momjian.us EDB https://enterprisedb.com Indecision is a decision. Inaction is an action. Mark Batterson
On 10.10.22 08:41, Tom Lane wrote: > What remains is to > define when is the cutoff point between "acknowledge in v15" versus > "acknowledge in v16". I don't have a strong opinion about that, > but I'd like it to be more than 24 hours before the 15.0 wrap. > Could we make the cutoff be, say, beta1? beta1 is too early, because a significant portion of the names comes in after beta1. rc1 would be ok, I think.