On Sat, May 12, 2012 at 09:27:21PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > >Should we go with a single developer per item, and then let people > >suggest corrections? With reviewers involved, and often multiple commit > >messages per release note item, the just isn't enough detail in git logs > >to reproduce this accurately. I also over-emphasized new > >developers/reviewers, but that seems to have distorted the other goals > >unacceptably. > > Most cases should be pretty clear. Most features have a single major > commit. The author(s) mentioned there are who should be listed, > IMNSHO. That might leave a handful of cases where more judgement is > required. > > We seem to be in danger of overthinking this.
Results have just shown it isn't a simple case. It is unclear how important the reviewers were, and how much a committer rewrote the patch, and the significance of follow-on commits. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
