Re: location of change list?

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От Ed Loehr
Тема Re: location of change list?
Дата
Msg-id 396E47B0.7636162D@austin.rr.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на location of change list?  (Ed Loehr <eloehr@austin.rr.com>)
Список pgsql-general
Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Ed Loehr <eloehr@austin.rr.com> writes:
> > Can anyone point me to a list of changes and bug-fixes *by release* for
> > 7.0.1 and 7.0.2 over 7.0?
>
> The only really accurate info is in the CVS logs.  Bruce usually
> prepares a summary for the release history, but if that's not good
> enough for you, get out your cvs client and look for yourself.
>
> The best way I've found so far is to cd to the top level of the
> area you are interested in (probably the top of your copy of the
> source tree) and do
>
> cvs log -rREL7_0_PATCHES -d '>2000-05-10' -N | more
>
> This is still pretty noisy --- it prints header info for all files
> including ones that haven't been modified in that branch, which tends to
> swamp out the stuff you're looking for :-(.  Does anyone have a better
> recipe?

This is almost too ugly to mention, but you could adopt a convention in
which "official" changelog entries (i.e., those to be auto-pumped into a
web page) are prefaced by some sort of tag to be filtered by grep, e.g.,

cvs log -rREL7_0_PATCHES -d '>2000-05-10' -N |
    grep OFFICIAL_CHANGE_LOG_ENTRY_TAG | more

Not suggesting that verbosity, but you get the idea...

A concise, web-obvious change-list would be valuable for people asking
the question, "What would I get if I upgraded to the latest version?"
Nice not to have to download the software or access CVS from that
perspective.  May I suggest OpenSSL's changelog as a good model for
that?  Maybe they might lend some insight as to how to make it
manageable...

    http://www.openssl.org/news/changelog.html

Regards,
Ed Loehr

В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Peter Eisentraut
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Figured it out (psql and Gnu readline)
Следующее
От: Chris Bitmead
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: Object oriented features - MISSING